Dikiyoba Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 You are given the opportunity to take a comprehensive skills and aptitude test. It will assess your physical and mental functioning, your social and basic skills competence (for instance literacy, the ability to order something at a restaurant, and the ability to detect sarcasm), and interests and aptitudes. Do you choose to take this test? Why or why not? If you do choose to take it, how often do you do so? (Assume you live in an ideal world. There are no issues with privacy breaches, any sort of discrimination, or incorrect information. The test is free, and has no gaps, biases, confusing instructions, or misleading questions. Everyone involved in creating, helping you answer, and scoring the quest is competent and completely nonjudgmental. The test can only measure what currently exists, and cannot directly predict anything, although you and the test scorers can make some predictions based on the results. In short, there are no human flaws or foibles that would give you a non-philosophical reason to avoid the test. It can't impact your career or reduce your access to medical care or anything like that. Also assume that everyone else will come to the same decision that you do, so your choice to take the test or not doesn't give you any advantages or disadvantages over anyone else.) Dikiyoba would take the test because Dikiyoba is drawn to information like some sort of data-collecting magpie. If it were taken every year or every other year, it would also have probably caught some of Dikiyoba's health problems before Dikiyoba identified them in this reality, which can only be a good thing. But mostly it would be for the acquisition of knowledge. Yek yek yek! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Does the ideal world setting mean mean things like "ability to detect sarcasm" are actually quantifiable and measurable? A great many worthwhile skills and abilities are not easily measured by an exam, at least not in the real world (one of the problems with the obsession over standardized testing that has overtaken education). My first thought is skepticism, doubt that any test could ever measure (in a meaningful way) all the things it claims to measure. But perhaps in the ideal setting it become possible to test those things. Unrelated question: how much time would test the take to complete? I might consider taking such a test, out of mere curiosity, but the larger the time commitment, the less likely I would be to bother. Could the test reveal more about myself than a good round of introspection would, or a conversation with a wise friend who knows me well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xaiya Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I would take it out of sheer curiosity and forget about the results the next day, like I do with every other personal test. It'd just be somewhat more interesting. Dunno if it could really tell me much more than I already know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Level 1 Hermit Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 A vast majority of humans would want to take the test. People want to learn more about themselves, and the test seems intriguing enough to attract takers. I myself would like to take it as well, as long as it's not too long of a test. :3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmisary of Immanence Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I would definitely take it. If this magic test were really able to fully identify a broad range of strengths and weaknesses, that's immensely helpful! Not just for trying to organize life around harnessing strengths and avoiding weaknesses but also for becoming aware of weaknesses and trying to retrain in those areas. —Alorael, who notes that things like sarcasm detection and empathy, which have been considered inborn personality traits, turn out to be things that can be taught, trained, and exercised. And there's also the conversation starter of, "So, did you know my aptitude for making pleasant conversation while quietly plotting your downfall is in the top 5%?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sudanna Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Absolutely yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Student of Trinity Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 If the test is really accurate then it's a great idea, but it's easy to suspect that in some subtle way it isn't really perfect. Some of the things that it's supposed to detect are things that can be achieved in a lot of very different ways, and it would be very easy for a test to fail to recognize some of these ways, and look only for others. In fact I at least half suspect that such a perfect test might be impossible in principle. If the test were even slightly unreliable, I might not want to take it. Even if it were in fact perfect, I probably wouldn't believe it could be. So I don't know. I might be unable to resist the curiosity to see what the test might say about me, but I'd have serious reservations, fearing that it might mislead me, and I might believe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgwyn Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I would take it as a baseline and then around every five years or so. Then if exposed to a TBI/Concussion or similar brain effecting event, the results could be used during the therapy process. Even without the health piece, I would take it once out of curiosity on how I would do. I have the same reservations as to how accurate such a test would be as everyone else, which effects how I would perceive the results, but that does not diminish its usefulness as a baseline of my cognitive abilities to compare to the same test administered later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A less presumptuous name. Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I would hesitate. Sometimes I don't want to know everything about me. I know that I have flaws and weaknesses, and I'm okay with that. But I don't really want a formalized report telling me about them. I might take the test out of pure curiosity, but I would keep the results secret and deny having taken the test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dikiyoba Posted April 5, 2014 Author Share Posted April 5, 2014 Does the ideal world setting mean mean things like "ability to detect sarcasm" are actually quantifiable and measurable? A great many worthwhile skills and abilities are not easily measured by an exam... Yes. If it helps, replace all uses of "test" with "assessment." There's no right or wrong answers, and answer sets are easily compared with one another. And it's a hypothetical perfect test, so questions reliably assess what they claim to be assessing. Unrelated question: how much time would test the take to complete? I might consider taking such a test, out of mere curiosity, but the larger the time commitment, the less likely I would be to bother. Could the test reveal more about myself than a good round of introspection would, or a conversation with a wise friend who knows me well? This would have to be quite a long test that would take multiple hours to complete. It would be hard to be comprehensive with a short test. Dikiyoba supposes you could take only certain sections of the test, if that's what you wanted to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Questionably Legal Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Absolutely, for most of the same reasons as Alorael. A weakness isn't something you should hide from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 Given all the stipulations Diki has provided, I can't think of a good reason not to take the test, and several good reasons to do it. As others have noted, the opportunity to gain greater insight into one's strengths and weaknesses could be quite helpful. Like Diki mentioned, the medical / health component could be profitable as well - the potential to detect problems early would be most welcome (something on my mind as I've learned of a problem I've apparently had for many years but which went undetected until relatively recently). Identifying abnormalities early could save a great deal of frustration. I think it'd be important not to take such a test too often - it'd be similar to weighing oneself excessively frequently while trying to lose weight. People are a lot like trees, in that both tend grow very slowly. Constantly remeasuring might drive a person to distraction, but wouldn't be beneficial. Perhaps once a year would be worthwhile rate at which to take such a test? Maybe even longer for the personal / life skills components, and annually for the physiological section? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A less presumptuous name. Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I wonder, with people talking about frequency of taking the test... Could the test indicate whether taking the test again, and if so, how frequently, would be beneficial? In that vein, I see a possible problem with this, in terms of a feedback loop. Suppose an individual predisposed to anxiety takes the test and is told about their predisposition. That sort of information could trigger anxiety. Knowing about the ability of the test to measure their anxiety, the individual may constantly worry about improving test results, actually worsening their anxiety. Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callie Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I would take it, but only once a year or so. I would doubt my ability to act on the results, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.