If the point is to use that UN database, then just go through the tree systematically asking “is this branch at all relevant?”. Prune out the branches that aren’t (you don’t have to look at every leaf), and you’re left with the more useful metrics. There’s no need to brainstorm—it’s just not that big.
If, on the other hand, you’re willing to conduct your own surveys, then I think we can do better than this. Craft survey questions that measure more directly what you’re interested in, instead of these proxies.
The waterline metaphor implies that there could be different levels of sanity. Someone sane enough to reject astrology might not be sane enough to sign up for cryonics, for example. So we might call the cryonics question more difficult than the astrology question. We don’t have to decide exactly where questions rank on the scale. The data will tell you.
Easy questions might be about common superstitions, magical thinking, pseudoscience, and conspiracy theories. Common skeptics can get these. Questions about basic science literacy might be a little harder. (e.g. dihydrogen monixide, evolution). There are also questions illustrating the various cognitive biases more directly as we’ve seen in the Sequences. And finally the “correct contrarian” positions are more difficult, like cryonics, many-worlds, molecular nanotechnology, existential risks, etc..
If the point is to use that UN database, then just go through the tree systematically asking “is this branch at all relevant?”. Prune out the branches that aren’t (you don’t have to look at every leaf), and you’re left with the more useful metrics. There’s no need to brainstorm—it’s just not that big.
If, on the other hand, you’re willing to conduct your own surveys, then I think we can do better than this. Craft survey questions that measure more directly what you’re interested in, instead of these proxies.
The waterline metaphor implies that there could be different levels of sanity. Someone sane enough to reject astrology might not be sane enough to sign up for cryonics, for example. So we might call the cryonics question more difficult than the astrology question. We don’t have to decide exactly where questions rank on the scale. The data will tell you.
Easy questions might be about common superstitions, magical thinking, pseudoscience, and conspiracy theories. Common skeptics can get these. Questions about basic science literacy might be a little harder. (e.g. dihydrogen monixide, evolution). There are also questions illustrating the various cognitive biases more directly as we’ve seen in the Sequences. And finally the “correct contrarian” positions are more difficult, like cryonics, many-worlds, molecular nanotechnology, existential risks, etc..