• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

logic-test

Pinker85

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
914
logic-test

"The goal is to demonstrate that you can easily get confused without some help from a good calculus, unless you are very experienced."

I'm curious how other people solved these. I did so through visualizations which seemed to naturally occur. I have no experience studying logic in an academic setting.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
logic-test

"The goal is to demonstrate that you can easily get confused without some help from a good calculus, unless you are very experienced."

I'm curious how other people solved these. I did so through visualizations which seemed to naturally occur. I have no experience studying logic in an academic setting.

This was actually a pretty cool test, and I have no formal training with logic either. Mass programming the multitudes with logic after all may ironically not be entirely logical!

The way I solved these was by drawing literal lines in my mind between the different letters or names. Certain chains linked together, and others couldn't connect. So I guess I solved these the same way you did, just by imagining a sort of diagram.

On the whole, that style seemed to work well for me, as you can see in my below results (15 of 19), but maybe a true logician would see more than just bridges between things; they could also possibly see a meta-system (a system about systems).

Perhaps this would cause them to solve problems like these not only through deduction, but also by knowing "why" the different causal chains exist and/or connect together. I really don't know what I'm talking about though; I was only offering a theory on how it works.

My Test Results said:
The result of your logictest
With a total of 26 questions 7 are answered with don't know !


15 of 19 answered questions are correctly answered!

Congratulations! Of the answered questions more than 3/4 are correctly answered. Not bad!

In detail:

4a) Doesn't follow: Minimal missing premise: It exists something that is dog and mean or dog and not animal


4e) Doesn't follow: Minimal missing premise: It exists something that is dog and little and mean or dog and not animal


5c) Doesn't follow: Minimal missing premise: It exists something that is A and not C or B and not C


7e) Doesn't follow: Minimal missing premise: All A and B and D are C
 

xisnotx

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,144
I got 20/26, and I did it in less than 5 mins.
Granted, I do have formal education in this...

I went with what "sounded" true in my head...(which is a good way to fail logic tests)

But, if I sat down, I'd be shocked if I couldn't work them all out...if I were to draw out venn diagrams....

Though it's just basic logic...

Like I remember trying to answer questions like "all A statements are tautological" "some B statements are tenable" and "all C statements are false" given that "some A statements are B statements, can you conclude that all B statements are A statements"? "What about the converse?" "What about the contrary?" "Are all C statements jointly satisfiable?"..."prove all assertions using truth tables..." I'd just be like "why am I even doing this?"

Then there's multi-variable logic, which is also a trip...

nevermind the fact that logic is limiting and therefore wholly irrelevant...(only partially relevant)
 

Jonny

null
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
3,134
MBTI Type
FREE
kryo.png


I feel as though any respectable math major would have to get 100% on this, provided s/he actually tried. Among them, the true score would be 1/(the time it took them to do it).
 

Pinker85

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
914
I received 26/26. :p I did a logic test on OKCupid that was loads harder and on that I didn't do nearly as well.
 

Fluxkom

New member
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
205
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
With a total of 26 questions 3 are answered with don't know !


21 of 23 answered questions are correctly answered!

Congratulations! You are a natural or used some helpers!
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
The result of your logictest
21 of 26 answered questions are correctly answered!

Congratulations! You are a natural or used some helpers!


Hey, not bad.
 

wonders

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
42
MBTI Type
Ti
Enneagram
Id
Got 26/26 :), I don't know exactly what they meant by helpers or calculus but I didn't use any of that. No formal training unless we count high school math and some introductory courses at university that I took out of interest... a long time ago too. -.-

Some of the simpler ones I just did by looking at them and knowing naturally because they were simple enough to not need additional processing. For the rest I didn't usually visualize anything either, just kind of processed them somehow. I will try to explain: a bit like fast speed reading of the sentence *vs* reading the sentence word by word and getting the result at the end. This latter version is what I did for deeper processing. The actual processing I suppose is done on an automatic level in my brain without much conscious access so that's all I can say about it.

A couple of times I did entertain myself by visualizing some arrows or sets of dogs/animals or A/B/C etc. This was not necessary though to solve the questions. As I said, this was more for entertainment now - my logic in general can be visualized well and sometimes in complex systems that *really* helps me simplify things but these questions were not complex enough for that.

Two times during the test, I also got "bored" enough (=some of my mental capacity was left too unoccupied) at a point that for entertainment I quickly made some simplifying rule or made up a reasoning why things were the way they were... this was useful though to answer some of the questions faster. (Of course only simple rules/reasoning as these questions were not too complex)

Someone mentioned they went by what sounded "true", that's exactly what I did in the "fast speed reading" mode for the simple ones. But I somehow have a very reliable warning signal in my brain that fires when the problem/question gets past the simple enough level where I can trust this completely automatic attitude and when that warning fires I go and switch into reading "word by word". I prefer being sure about my guess and will not give the answer without verifying first on a conscious level. Though I usually get it right... I still just don't trust it before verifying it. And sometimes I don't even have a guess anyway. :) Otoh, in complex mathematical problems, I can sometimes fully trust the feeling that I somehow know the answer and it does work out when I check it on the conscious level. I still like to verify all of those of course.



This was actually a pretty cool test, and I have no formal training with logic either. Mass programming the multitudes with logic after all may ironically not be entirely logical!

What multitudes and mass programming are you talking about? Just curious what you meant by that.


On the whole, that style seemed to work well for me, as you can see in my below results (15 of 19), but maybe a true logician would see more than just bridges between things; they could also possibly see a meta-system (a system about systems).

Perhaps this would cause them to solve problems like these not only through deduction, but also by knowing "why" the different causal chains exist and/or connect together. I really don't know what I'm talking about though; I was only offering a theory on how it works.

I'm not a formal logician but I do like this sort of approach you describe.



I received 26/26. :p I did a logic test on OKCupid that was loads harder and on that I didn't do nearly as well.

Can you give a link to that one? :)
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
What multitudes and mass programming are you talking about? Just curious what you meant by that.

That's what our society does to us. Educational systems are all about stupid command heirarchies and just doing what you're suppost to do. Real logic shouldn't be about following strict steps or rules set out before us by others. We are pretty much always going to find that the system is incomplete and that even a little bit of logic can go a long ways in improving the old ways.

This is why children tend to be so open-minded; they ask lots of questions but adults always try to explain it away with dumb reponces about how that's just the way it is. What we need more of is radical openness!

For reference, Jason Silva has a good perspective free of restrictive conditioning:

Engineering Our Own Divinity
 

citizen cane

ornery ornithologist
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
3,854
MBTI Type
BIRD
Enneagram
631
Instinctual Variant
sp
Real logic shouldn't be about following strict steps or rules set out before us by others. We are pretty much always going to find that the system is incomplete and that even a little bit of logic can go a long ways in improving the old ways.
What do you think real logic should be about then?
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
What do you think real logic should be about then?

That's actually a very good question. I think it should be about seeing why things happen, as I described on page 1 post 2. It should also involve the idea of design, that is, being able to build something out of it. If we can see what logically follows this chain or what connects that bridge and so forth, it can take us to higher levels. I guess for me logic is about ascension, the ascension of mind to see the prime causes moving any kind of world system.

To put that more simply, just question a whole bunch of stuff and chase it as far as it will go; the Taoists after all say this - A journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step.
 

wonders

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
42
MBTI Type
Ti
Enneagram
Id
That's actually a very good question. I think it should be about seeing why things happen, as I described on page 1 post 2. It should also involve the idea of design, that is, being able to build something out of it. If we can see what logically follows this chain or what connects that bridge and so forth, it can take us to higher levels. I guess for me logic is about ascension, the ascension of mind to see the prime causes moving any kind of world system.

To put that more simply, just question a whole bunch of stuff and chase it as far as it will go; the Taoists after all say this - A journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step.

Hm? What's new in that? Scientists are supposed to work this way
 
Top