What!? I’m not rational if I rely on my right brain to do it’s job? True rationalists act rational when you take out a big chunk of their circuitry? When you remove a component of your negative feedback loop (I assume: nature uses them often) you should act normal? I’d suspect a person who could would be paranoid that everyone is lying once the right brain is put back online!
From the little I understand, for people both unprepared for the experience (everyone who’s had it) and not thinking of it as a test of rationality (again, everyone), the left brain confabulates elaborate scenarios to justify retaining the beliefs, and the (damaged) right brain fails to adequately consider new hypotheses.
It seems people with stronger left brains, roughly higher IQ, should be more prone to being stupid in this way, and failing the test, than people with less of an ability to justify their beliefs.
My point is that it would give a rationality/intelligence ratio, so its ability to measure rationality depends on our separate ability to measure intelligence which is currently pretty crude. If we can induce measured degrees of artificial anosognosia, and report at what level each subject can no longer save him or herself with rationality, and measure intelligence, then we could nail down rationality more precisely.
My hypothesis is that the smarter someone is, the more impressed we will be with the extent he or she remained rational while being magnetically stultified.
Perhaps such a test would become part of an objective method to measure rationality.
What!? I’m not rational if I rely on my right brain to do it’s job? True rationalists act rational when you take out a big chunk of their circuitry? When you remove a component of your negative feedback loop (I assume: nature uses them often) you should act normal? I’d suspect a person who could would be paranoid that everyone is lying once the right brain is put back online!
From the little I understand, for people both unprepared for the experience (everyone who’s had it) and not thinking of it as a test of rationality (again, everyone), the left brain confabulates elaborate scenarios to justify retaining the beliefs, and the (damaged) right brain fails to adequately consider new hypotheses.
It seems people with stronger left brains, roughly higher IQ, should be more prone to being stupid in this way, and failing the test, than people with less of an ability to justify their beliefs.
This would still be a way to test rationality. If it makes you stupid, you’re probably rational.
My point is that it would give a rationality/intelligence ratio, so its ability to measure rationality depends on our separate ability to measure intelligence which is currently pretty crude. If we can induce measured degrees of artificial anosognosia, and report at what level each subject can no longer save him or herself with rationality, and measure intelligence, then we could nail down rationality more precisely.
My hypothesis is that the smarter someone is, the more impressed we will be with the extent he or she remained rational while being magnetically stultified.
A better test would be to remove the brain’s left hemisphere and then test their confidence calibration.