The subject’s capacity for deception is finite, and will be needed elsewhere. Sooner or later it becomes more cost-effective for the sincere belief to change.
I generally agree with your point. The problem with the specific application is that the subject’s capacity for thinking logically (especially if you want the logic to be correct) is even more limited.
If the subject is marginally capable of logical thought, the straightforward response is to try stupid random things until it becomes obvious that going along with what you want is the least exhausting option. Even fruit flies are capable of learning from personal experience.
In the event of total incapacity at logical thought… why are you going to all this trouble? What do you actually want?
If the subject is marginally capable of logical thought, the straightforward response is to try stupid random things until it becomes obvious that going along with what you want is the least exhausting option.
That depends on how much effort you’re willing to spend on each subject verifying that they’re not faking.
The subject’s capacity for deception is finite, and will be needed elsewhere. Sooner or later it becomes more cost-effective for the sincere belief to change.
That is breathtakingly both the most cynical and beautiful thing I have read all day :)
Postcynicism FTW!
I generally agree with your point. The problem with the specific application is that the subject’s capacity for thinking logically (especially if you want the logic to be correct) is even more limited.
If the subject is marginally capable of logical thought, the straightforward response is to try stupid random things until it becomes obvious that going along with what you want is the least exhausting option. Even fruit flies are capable of learning from personal experience.
In the event of total incapacity at logical thought… why are you going to all this trouble? What do you actually want?
That depends on how much effort you’re willing to spend on each subject verifying that they’re not faking.