DACrowe wrote:how wide are your error bars?
DACrowe wrote:Whilst I'm fairly well caught up on the literature on intelligence testing, how do you propose measuring niceness? I assume you don't mean strict equality when you talk about 'equally nice', but how wide are your error bars (if that's not a personal question)?
maxray wrote:We can go the easiest way and count the average number of nice things done daily, but that will require defining "nice", and that's even harder.
Or we can just make people do some irrelevant tests with a lot of horrible personal questions that you have to answer in your own words. Thus the people with the lowest amount of swear words will get the highest niceness score.
4AD wrote:well I think ...
DACrowe wrote:That's one obstacle, but it isn't insurmountable. We could define niceness perhaps in terms of a (foreseeable) positive imbalance in your actions between the utility you gain (or lose) and the utility someone else gains. If we could define utility. One problem is timeframe. If I got a day without doing anything especially nice, am I not a nice person? What if I did a really nice thing yesterday. Yet it seems fair to say that someone whose gone a year without doing anything nice probably isn't nice (or maybe not; if Superman saves the world does he get to chill out for the next few years?)
DACRowe wrote:That doesn't adequately control for 'wet blanket syndrome' or alternatively the Stanley Millgram folks who will politely answer horrible questions but just as politely torture people on the request of an experimenter. Torture isn't nice.
Return to The Personal Ads Board
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests