This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

MadPuzzler's Profile

MadPuzzler's Avatar Joined almost 2 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by MadPuzzler

More Discussions by MadPuzzler

Latest Comments by MadPuzzler

Go to: Why smart people are stupid

MadPuzzler's Avatar Jump to comment 93 by MadPuzzler

Genetic Fallacy: A conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth.

Your example:

I'm glad that as a new member, you can put the mathematicians and philosophers on this site into their boxes....it should make for some interesting discussions. Not to mention the questioner who has got his whole experiment up the feckin' left.

Your conclusion about me also has nothing to do with the question at hand. How much does ball cost?

Slippery Slope: This is a conclusion based on the premise that if A happens, then eventually through a series of small steps, through B, C,..., X, Y, Z will happen, too, basically equating A and Z. So, if we don't want Z to occur, A must not be allowed to occur either

Your Example: YOU ARE OVERCOOKING THE PROBLEM.

That claim also begs itself. Begging the Claim: The conclusion that the writer should prove is validated within the claim.

moving on...

Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather than her/his opinions or arguments.

Your example: You are like a dog with a new chew toy

Ad populum: This is an emotional appeal that speaks to positive (such as patriotism, religion, democracy) or negative (such as terrorism or fascism) concepts rather than the real issue at hand.

Your example: One last try....it doesn't matter about the one or even all the answers that you think are right...it's the wrong answer that immediately jumps to peoples minds that is important.

Sat, 16 Jun 2012 13:12:03 UTC | #947696

Go to: Why smart people are stupid

MadPuzzler's Avatar Jump to comment 91 by MadPuzzler

Comment 90 by Ignorant Amos :

Comment 89 by MadPuzzler

Don't be lazy and fall victim to the power of suggestion. 105 and 5 was the QUESTIONER's answer to the QUESTIONER's problem. The QUESTIONER's problem can be shown to have many other answers. Now why you are you happy with whatever the Questioner says? Fewest steps to agree with someone! you so Occam!

I'm happy with the questioners answer because before seeing his answer I had come up with the same conclusion and was chuffed with myself for doing so. No thoughts of William of Ockham or various alternative answers. I might add that my partners immediate response was a dollar.

A dollar and 5 cents was the most obvious to me, given MY understanding of what the question was asking me.

You gave it too much thought....you over analysed it. You delved to deeply into the minutiae of the problem which became your downfall.

It was a 'simple' piece of mental arithmetic designed to court a 'quick' response without it being given too much thought. That was it's purpose. The knee jerk answer by smart people, according to the article, is the same as that given by thicko's....namely...a dollar...which is the wrong answer regardless of anything you have said or done to prove otherwise. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. Unless the ball is free and there is 10 cents change, which there could well be because the questioner omits that possibility too. There is no need to overcook the problem.

Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill....you keep digging...like everyone else, I too am becoming a tad bored.

Deep down there must be something like, well my answer is the same as the questioner's therefore that completes the all possible answers list.

You enjoy your twix bar, I will enjoy five others too.

Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:22:02 UTC | #947693

Go to: Why smart people are stupid

MadPuzzler's Avatar Jump to comment 89 by MadPuzzler

Comment 85 by Ignorant Amos :

Comment 70 by ZenDruid

You're doing Occam's Razor wrong.

Obviously.

I was thinking the same as I lay in bed mulling this nonsense over and trying to get over to sleep.

One intuitive justification of Occam's razor's admonition against unnecessary hypotheses is a direct result of basic probability theory. By definition, all assumptions introduce possibilities for error; if an assumption does not improve the accuracy of a theory, its only effect is to increase the probability that the overall theory is wrong.

The problem as I see it, is that the 'smart' are so 'smart' they invariably think they have no requirement to 'check their work' as Susan states and which is something that I've found to be a necessity in undertaking my recent re-education, failure to do so costs valuable points on assignments. The very clever see a 'simple' problem that is also deemed too 'simple' to waste too much time on thinking through.

Ockham said, "The source of many errors in philosophy is the claim that a distinct signified thing always corresponds to a distinct word in such a way that there are as many distinct entities being signified as there are distinct names or words doing the signifying."

Michael is write (pun intended) about understanding the question i.e. English.

One of the problems with the original formulation of the principle is that it only applies to models with the same explanatory power (i.e. prefer the simplest of equally good models).

As I see it, those that get the question wrong in the first place are using Ockham's Razor...

...according to the principle, a simpler but less correct theory should not be preferred over a more complex but more correct one. It is this fact which gives the lie to the common misinterpretation of Occam's razor that "the simplest" one is usually the correct one.

Here is one for ya all....

An aquarium holds 100 fish, half drown, how many are left? }80)~

Don't be lazy and fall victim to the power of suggestion. 105 and 5 was the QUESTIONER's answer to the QUESTIONER's problem. The QUESTIONER's problem can be shown to have many other answers. Now why you are you happy with whatever the Questioner says? Fewest steps to agree with someone! you so Occam!

Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:25:44 UTC | #947690

Go to: Why smart people are stupid

MadPuzzler's Avatar Jump to comment 87 by MadPuzzler

Play with Ball and Bat. The link to the code that could not be more to the point than we should expect.

http://codepad.org/zOk6tD6W

The source is the C++ language.

Sat, 16 Jun 2012 10:59:00 UTC | #947686

Go to: Why smart people are stupid

MadPuzzler's Avatar Jump to comment 69 by MadPuzzler

@mmuray "BAT - BALL = $1"

You are assuming the difference must be (versus at least must be). The truth is the problem only says more than. 1.00 more than. It doesn't say it must only be 1.00 more than.

This is why I say now in regard to Occam's razor, only we can get it wrong, and if we do we shouldn't feel blame.

Sat, 16 Jun 2012 01:17:43 UTC | #947653

More Comments by MadPuzzler