Mudkipcorn
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 12 de Nov, 2021
The breakfast question isn't the 'gotcha' that people like to think it is. It can be valuable and demonstrate whether someone is retarded or not, but it's also easy for someone to get tripped on it because of context and the fact that humans are social creatures who (quite reasonably) won't necessarily realize they're having their brain probed when someone poses an odd question. It's not some perfect retard-seeking bullet.
When someone asks you a question about yourself, it's generally either because they are genuinely interested in learning more about you or are just making small talk. So in answering the question, it's reasonable to assume one of those intentions. People that 'fail' often do so because in the context it isn't at all clear that they're facing a cognitive test. It doesn't prove someone is literally incapable of abstract or conditional thinking. Dumb people are far more likely to fail, but even a very intelligent, hypothetical-grasping person can too.
First off, it's an unusual question to ask. A reasonable person might raise their eyebrow and guess that they're really being asked whether they had breakfast. Especially in the context of a casual conversation. What's more, the question is often asked in the middle of arguments or tense dialogues, which muddies things further. It's normal to be defensive in such situations, especially when you're faced with what appears to be a strange non-sequitur coming from a hostile party.
If in the middle of a heated political debate, suppose I asked a Trump supporter how they would feel if a video leaked showing Donald Trump having sex with a kid while eating two scoops of ice cream and talking about bringing more immigrants into the US. Most would probably say something about how Trump never did that, I have TDS and lefties are the real pedos. If I asked again, they'd refuse to answer, pointing out that that never happened and the scenario is patently ridiculous.
That would be a reasonable response to the question, but it would count as a failure. Especially in the context of a combative discussion, very few people would give a passable answer like "I would be horrified and reassess my support for him". Does that mean most Trump supporters are retards who can't comprehend counterfactuals?
What's more, there aare an infinite number of 'correct' answers to the breakfast question and it can be ambiguous what passes and what fails. You can answer something like "I never eat breakfast" and that will probably be seen as a failure. You didn't directly say how you would feel. But context comes in here too.
If I were randomly asked the question, that's probably how I'd answer: "I only very rarely eat breakfast". The 'correct' answer would be "I would feel normal" though. But the first response tells the asker more about me than the strict or literal answer would. In a normal human conversation, it's perfectly acceptable and even desirable to respond to questions in that way. The answer might not correspond to the exact question being asked, but ultimately it provides the person with more insight.
In the context of a clinical cognitive test, a direct response to the hypothetical is obviously the 'passing' move. But the breakfast question is generally posed in the context of a dialogue where the person doesn't know they're being tested. Giving an answer that displays social intelligence doesn't necessarily mean you're retarded.
And from a different perspective, "I only very rarely eat breakfast" does answer the question, it just does so by implication. It can easily be understood as being another way of saying "normal"; I would feel normal because not eating breakfast is my daily routine.
Finally, the question doesn't always work because it isn't always a counterfactual. If I answer "as it happens, I didn't eat breakfast today", what then? Did I fail because I didn't say "I'd feel normal"? How can you prove that I am incapable of grasping conditional hypotheticals when you haven't even asked me a truly hypothetical question? My answer is just letting you know you asked the wrong question. This last point is the most niche, but it still shows a flaw in the Breakfast Question Intelligence Benchmark System.
Don't get me wrong, there is some worth to the question. I've seen funny clips of stupid people clearly not getting it. Brian's approach to quizzing Dunye on it was actually quite apt and very funny. But to have any value, the question has to be asked in the correct way. And you can't just take someone's first and immediate answer and write them off as a retard if there's an issue with it.
Basically, it's a funny meme but as an actual metric for someone's intelligence the breakfast question is deeply flawed. It can be asked in such a way that may provide useful information, but this is almost never done.
When someone asks you a question about yourself, it's generally either because they are genuinely interested in learning more about you or are just making small talk. So in answering the question, it's reasonable to assume one of those intentions. People that 'fail' often do so because in the context it isn't at all clear that they're facing a cognitive test. It doesn't prove someone is literally incapable of abstract or conditional thinking. Dumb people are far more likely to fail, but even a very intelligent, hypothetical-grasping person can too.
First off, it's an unusual question to ask. A reasonable person might raise their eyebrow and guess that they're really being asked whether they had breakfast. Especially in the context of a casual conversation. What's more, the question is often asked in the middle of arguments or tense dialogues, which muddies things further. It's normal to be defensive in such situations, especially when you're faced with what appears to be a strange non-sequitur coming from a hostile party.
If in the middle of a heated political debate, suppose I asked a Trump supporter how they would feel if a video leaked showing Donald Trump having sex with a kid while eating two scoops of ice cream and talking about bringing more immigrants into the US. Most would probably say something about how Trump never did that, I have TDS and lefties are the real pedos. If I asked again, they'd refuse to answer, pointing out that that never happened and the scenario is patently ridiculous.
That would be a reasonable response to the question, but it would count as a failure. Especially in the context of a combative discussion, very few people would give a passable answer like "I would be horrified and reassess my support for him". Does that mean most Trump supporters are retards who can't comprehend counterfactuals?
What's more, there aare an infinite number of 'correct' answers to the breakfast question and it can be ambiguous what passes and what fails. You can answer something like "I never eat breakfast" and that will probably be seen as a failure. You didn't directly say how you would feel. But context comes in here too.
If I were randomly asked the question, that's probably how I'd answer: "I only very rarely eat breakfast". The 'correct' answer would be "I would feel normal" though. But the first response tells the asker more about me than the strict or literal answer would. In a normal human conversation, it's perfectly acceptable and even desirable to respond to questions in that way. The answer might not correspond to the exact question being asked, but ultimately it provides the person with more insight.
In the context of a clinical cognitive test, a direct response to the hypothetical is obviously the 'passing' move. But the breakfast question is generally posed in the context of a dialogue where the person doesn't know they're being tested. Giving an answer that displays social intelligence doesn't necessarily mean you're retarded.
And from a different perspective, "I only very rarely eat breakfast" does answer the question, it just does so by implication. It can easily be understood as being another way of saying "normal"; I would feel normal because not eating breakfast is my daily routine.
Finally, the question doesn't always work because it isn't always a counterfactual. If I answer "as it happens, I didn't eat breakfast today", what then? Did I fail because I didn't say "I'd feel normal"? How can you prove that I am incapable of grasping conditional hypotheticals when you haven't even asked me a truly hypothetical question? My answer is just letting you know you asked the wrong question. This last point is the most niche, but it still shows a flaw in the Breakfast Question Intelligence Benchmark System.
Don't get me wrong, there is some worth to the question. I've seen funny clips of stupid people clearly not getting it. Brian's approach to quizzing Dunye on it was actually quite apt and very funny. But to have any value, the question has to be asked in the correct way. And you can't just take someone's first and immediate answer and write them off as a retard if there's an issue with it.
Basically, it's a funny meme but as an actual metric for someone's intelligence the breakfast question is deeply flawed. It can be asked in such a way that may provide useful information, but this is almost never done.
Última edición:
