- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Are you brainier than a chimp?
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Are you brainier than a chimp?"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostThe article doesn't make sense. Rosling is reported as saying that the people polled knew "less about the world than chimpanzees". However, it then goes on to quote him as saying "If for each question I wrote each of the possible alternatives on bananas, and asked chimpanzees in the zoo to pick the right answers, and by picking the right bananas, they'd just pick bananas at random. But the Brits did even worse." As far as I can tell from that rather oddly-phrased statement, he's saying that the chimps would select bananas purely at random, and that the British people polled did worse than random.
But that doesn't mean there is any comparison between levels of intelligence, or even knowledge, going on. The chimps aren't having their intelligence levels measured; they're being used as random number generators. If a human chooses A as an answer to a particular question, it will be because they've used their cognitive abilities combined with their knowledge of the world to work out what the correct answer is; the hypothetical ape just grabs a banana at random, let's say B. If it turns out the ape has the right answer, it doesn't make the ape brainier than the human; if the positions are reversed, it doesn't imply that the human is smarter than the ape.
All that getting a score worse than random implies is that a non-random method was used to choose the answers. It says nothing about relative intelligence of species. Anyway, they didn't even use any apes; who's to say that real chimps would produce a truly random response?
Incidentally, I would assume this is sloppy journalism, as is most reporting on scientific matters. This seems to be confirmed by reading Rosling's own, chimp-free, summary of the findings. You can find out more about Rosling's Gapminder project at The Ignorance Project.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostThe article doesn't make sense. Rosling is reported as saying that the people polled knew "less about the world than chimpanzees". However, it then goes on to quote him as saying "If for each question I wrote each of the possible alternatives on bananas, and asked chimpanzees in the zoo to pick the right answers, and by picking the right bananas, they'd just pick bananas at random. But the Brits did even worse." As far as I can tell from that rather oddly-phrased statement, he's saying that the chimps would select bananas purely at random, and that the British people polled did worse than random.
But that doesn't mean there is any comparison between levels of intelligence, or even knowledge, going on. The chimps aren't having their intelligence levels measured; they're being used as random number generators. If a human chooses A as an answer to a particular question, it will be because they've used their cognitive abilities combined with their knowledge of the world to work out what the correct answer is; the hypothetical ape just grabs a banana at random, let's say B. If it turns out the ape has the right answer, it doesn't make the ape brainier than the human; if the positions are reversed, it doesn't imply that the human is smarter than the ape.
All that getting a score worse than random implies is that a non-random method was used to choose the answers. It says nothing about relative intelligence of species. Anyway, they didn't even use any apes; who's to say that real chimps would produce a truly random response?
Incidentally, I would assume this is sloppy journalism, as is most reporting on scientific matters. This seems to be confirmed by reading Rosling's own, chimp-free, summary of the findings. You can find out more about Rosling's Gapminder project at The Ignorance Project.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kevpuk View PostOnly look at the pictures...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostThe article doesn't make sense. Rosling is reported as saying that the people polled knew "less about the world than chimpanzees". However, it then goes on to quote him as saying "If for each question I wrote each of the possible alternatives on bananas, and asked chimpanzees in the zoo to pick the right answers, and by picking the right bananas, they'd just pick bananas at random. But the Brits did even worse." As far as I can tell from that rather oddly-phrased statement, he's saying that the chimps would select bananas purely at random, and that the British people polled did worse than random.
But that doesn't mean there is any comparison between levels of intelligence, or even knowledge, going on. The chimps aren't having their intelligence levels measured; they're being used as random number generators. If a human chooses A as an answer to a particular question, it will be because they've used their cognitive abilities combined with their knowledge of the world to work out what the correct answer is; the hypothetical ape just grabs a banana at random, let's say B. If it turns out the ape has the right answer, it doesn't make the ape brainier than the human; if the positions are reversed, it doesn't imply that the human is smarter than the ape.
All that getting a score worse than random implies is that a non-random method was used to choose the answers. It says nothing about relative intelligence of species. Anyway, they didn't even use any apes; who's to say that real chimps would produce a truly random response?
Incidentally, I would assume this is sloppy journalism, as is most reporting on scientific matters. This seems to be confirmed by reading Rosling's own, chimp-free, summary of the findings. You can find out more about Rosling's Gapminder project at The Ignorance Project.
Leave a comment:
-
The article doesn't make sense. Rosling is reported as saying that the people polled knew "less about the world than chimpanzees". However, it then goes on to quote him as saying "If for each question I wrote each of the possible alternatives on bananas, and asked chimpanzees in the zoo to pick the right answers, and by picking the right bananas, they'd just pick bananas at random. But the Brits did even worse." As far as I can tell from that rather oddly-phrased statement, he's saying that the chimps would select bananas purely at random, and that the British people polled did worse than random.
But that doesn't mean there is any comparison between levels of intelligence, or even knowledge, going on. The chimps aren't having their intelligence levels measured; they're being used as random number generators. If a human chooses A as an answer to a particular question, it will be because they've used their cognitive abilities combined with their knowledge of the world to work out what the correct answer is; the hypothetical ape just grabs a banana at random, let's say B. If it turns out the ape has the right answer, it doesn't make the ape brainier than the human; if the positions are reversed, it doesn't imply that the human is smarter than the ape.
All that getting a score worse than random implies is that a non-random method was used to choose the answers. It says nothing about relative intelligence of species. Anyway, they didn't even use any apes; who's to say that real chimps would produce a truly random response?
Incidentally, I would assume this is sloppy journalism, as is most reporting on scientific matters. This seems to be confirmed by reading Rosling's own, chimp-free, summary of the findings. You can find out more about Rosling's Gapminder project at The Ignorance Project.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Are you brainier than a chimp?
When pollsters got 1,000 British people to take Rosling's "ignorance survey" in May this year, the results suggested they knew "less about the world than chimpanzees", he says.
Do the test, scratch your armpits, and shout 'ooh ooh ooh' here;
BBC News - Hans Rosling: Do you know more about the world than a chimpanzee?
I got 7/9, making me a 'Great Ape'!Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Secondary NI threshold sinking to £5,000: a limited company director’s explainer Dec 24 09:51
- Reeves sets Spring Statement 2025 for March 26th Dec 23 09:18
- Spot the hidden contractor Dec 20 10:43
- Accounting for Contractors Dec 19 15:30
- Chartered Accountants with MarchMutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants with March Mutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants Dec 19 15:05
- Unfairly barred from contracting? Petrofac just paid the price Dec 19 09:43
- An IR35 case law look back: contractor must-knows for 2025-26 Dec 18 09:30
- A contractor’s Autumn Budget financial review Dec 17 10:59
Leave a comment: