It looks as if the teacher’s password here is to answer “Yes”, yet most of these questions call for a considered “No” or “Does not compute”. To give a few concrete examples:
Do you, in every situation, endeavour to have an accurate map of the territory?
Seeking accuracy in every situation is extremely bad time management.
Do you regularly ask, …
Depending on the sense of “regularly”, explicitly reciting questions of doubtful practical use doesn’t seem like a reasonable course of action. Some of these questions should be cemented into habits of thought, at which point you don’t explicitly ask them, even as you benefit from their purpose.
Do you stop reading when a source becomes irrelevant?
Irrelevant how? Maybe it’s pleasant reading.
Do you ever call topics or ideas boring, shallow, crazy, beneath you, or confusing (or other words that close off thought)?
This is great feedback, thanks! Let me try address some of it.
Seeking accuracy in every situation is extremely bad time management.
I agree; that’s not what I meant to suggest. Not sure if I’ll be able to convey this better. I’m trying to ask whether the person legitimately wants an accurate map (where it matters to them).
Depending on the sense of “regularly”,...
I agree. Every question with a “regularly” or “frequently” or similar may just not work, period. How do I ask a question that determines if someone actually asks about the causes of their beliefs, whether consciously or habitually? It certainly requires self-awareness and self-honesty on their part. It could be changed to, “In the last 24 hours have you …”
Irrelevant how? Maybe it’s pleasant reading.
Irrelevant to the current investigation. If you’re genuinely curious about what you’re investigating, you’ll drop irrelevant information in favor of what’s higher value. I’ll try rewording this.
Numerology, astrology, time cubism?..
I expect you don’t spend time on astrology because you’ve deemed it false, not because you ignored it for being “shallow” etc.? In other words, I’m trying to ask “do you avoid thinking about topics for the wrong reasons?” This might not be possible. Also, I should probably drop the word ‘boring’.
(Actually, the first thing I did after reading that was think, “time cubism, what?” googled it, and read about it for a few minutes.)
It looks as if the teacher’s password here is to answer “Yes”, yet most of these questions call for a considered “No” or “Does not compute”. To give a few concrete examples:
Seeking accuracy in every situation is extremely bad time management.
Depending on the sense of “regularly”, explicitly reciting questions of doubtful practical use doesn’t seem like a reasonable course of action. Some of these questions should be cemented into habits of thought, at which point you don’t explicitly ask them, even as you benefit from their purpose.
Irrelevant how? Maybe it’s pleasant reading.
Numerology, astrology, time cubism?..
This is great feedback, thanks! Let me try address some of it.
I agree; that’s not what I meant to suggest. Not sure if I’ll be able to convey this better. I’m trying to ask whether the person legitimately wants an accurate map (where it matters to them).
I agree. Every question with a “regularly” or “frequently” or similar may just not work, period. How do I ask a question that determines if someone actually asks about the causes of their beliefs, whether consciously or habitually? It certainly requires self-awareness and self-honesty on their part. It could be changed to, “In the last 24 hours have you …”
Irrelevant to the current investigation. If you’re genuinely curious about what you’re investigating, you’ll drop irrelevant information in favor of what’s higher value. I’ll try rewording this.
I expect you don’t spend time on astrology because you’ve deemed it false, not because you ignored it for being “shallow” etc.? In other words, I’m trying to ask “do you avoid thinking about topics for the wrong reasons?” This might not be possible. Also, I should probably drop the word ‘boring’.
(Actually, the first thing I did after reading that was think, “time cubism, what?” googled it, and read about it for a few minutes.)