Only one-third of adults can reason formally

[SoulRiser]

I was reading this wikipedia article, and it had a link to this page, stating that 2 thirds of adults don't properly complete the developmental stage before puberty, and therefore can't actually reason logically. As in, they are not physically capable. That's a scary thought.

[Darthmat]

to much at this time of night and to many big words.. waht does all of that mean?

[Guest]

The key there is reason formally. This refers to the formal stage. The study shows that two thirds of adults are stuck at the concrete stage. People at the concrete stage can reason normally and properly. What they cannot do is completely comprehend complex things which is what the one third of people at the formal stage can do.

For example:
People at the concrete stage can do the nuts and bolts of math up to the highest levels possible. Only people at the formal stage can intuitively understand what the math means.

[Darthmat]

thank you kirby

[youvebeenthunderstruck]

SoulRiser Wrote:I was reading this wikipedia article, and it had a link to this page, stating that 2 thirds of adults don't properly complete the developmental stage before puberty, and therefore can't actually reason logically. As in, they are not physically capable. That's a scary thought.

well, it's certainly a big fucking change from all these 'children are inferior to adults and must therefore be treated like crap because their brains don't work as well' articles! what's their excuse now?

[magikarp]

My new reason for why I suck at math:

Kirby Wrote:For example:
People at the concrete stage can do the nuts and bolts of math up to the highest levels possible. Only people at the formal stage can intuitively understand what the math means.

[Will]

fist_of_doom Wrote:My new reason for why I suck at math:

Kirby Wrote:For example:
People at the concrete stage can do the nuts and bolts of math up to the highest levels possible. Only people at the formal stage can intuitively understand what the math means.

I think a lot of people use reasons like this ("I'm too old to learn a new language," "I'm not good at something," etc.) as excuses not to learn stuff. While I understand why you would want to give this excuse to unreasonable idiots, (You may not want to learn more about "math," which is fine.) I hope you realize that you can always get better at something if you really want to.

That said, even if the article is totally false, we all know that babies learn better than adults, so if we want to learn (do) something, we should do it now instead of waiting. I will now proceed to read the article.

EDIT: Now I've read the article. It's interesting, but it's not strong enough that I'd tell idiots about it. I'm looking up the writer so I can see whether he has credentials that would make him valid to idiots. He recently died, so emails to the contact address may not get answered. Also, I would not be surprised if the site goes down soon, but there's a record for it in the Internet Archive.

[SoulRiser]

Something sort of related, also from wikipedia:

Quote:In Stage six, moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and that a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Rights are unnecessary as social contracts are not essential for deontic moral action. Decisions are not met hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way (see Immanuel Kant's 'categorical imperative'[13]). This can be done by imagining what one would do being in anyone's shoes, who imagined what anyone would do thinking the same (see John Rawls's 'veil of ignorance'[14]). The resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an end in itself; one acts because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected, legal or previously agreed upon. While Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he had difficulty finding participants who consistently used it. It appears that people rarely if ever reach stage six of Kohlberg's model.

Poor guy. I could've shown him a few examples

[magikarp]

wsgosset Wrote:

fist_of_doom Wrote:My new reason for why I suck at math:

Kirby Wrote:For example:
People at the concrete stage can do the nuts and bolts of math up to the highest levels possible. Only people at the formal stage can intuitively understand what the math means.

I think a lot of people use reasons like this ("I'm too old to learn a new language," "I'm not good at something," etc.) as excuses not to learn stuff. While I understand why you would want to give this excuse to unreasonable idiots, (You may not want to learn more about "math," which is fine.) I hope you realize that you can always get better at something if you really want to.

That said, even if the article is totally false, we all know that babies learn better than adults, so if we want to learn (do) something, we should do it now instead of waiting. I will now proceed to read the article.

Sorry, I meant excuse and should have said that. I'm actually decent at math, and most of my problems with school-related math are caused by poor concentration, not lack of ability.

Improvement is always possible, but I think there are also limits to our understanding. What this means about what you decide to learn is a matter of perspective and situation.

And another article on moral reasoning here.

[SoulRiser]

fist_of_doom Wrote:And another article on moral reasoning here.

That was damn good. Funny how rare these things seem to be... (I mean, the other dude had a hard time even proving that anyone was on that 6th level of his theory, and now this guy's books and writings are hard to find and hardly anyone is bothering to circulate them.)

[James Comey]

https://www.uab.edu/news/service/item/62...a-families

wtf