Refined the Turing Test Survey

I’ve revised the judging form for the Ideological Turing Test (starting tomorrow) based on your comments.  Here’s the updated link.  I’ve split the “How compelling/attractive do you find this entry?” question into two parts, and below is the language that introduces that section.

For the next two questions, I want you to judge the CONTENT of the entry. Regardless of whether you think the writer is sincere, are they making a good pitch for their side?

The first question asks you to evaluate the logic of the answers. You may not share all the assumptions of the author, even if s/he is ostensibly on your side, but do you think the worldview is fairly coherent?

The second question asks how attractive the worldview of the author is. For this question, try to approach the answers as you would a fantasy or scifi world. Regardless of whether it’s true, is it attractive? Would you want to visit or live in that world?

Last year, some participants imitated ‘dumb’ or ‘boring’ members of the other team and passed.  I want to see if people agree that those answers are lackluster this time around, if anyone uses the same strategy.  I’m also curious whether the most plausibly sincere entries are generally seen as the best responses, and if these assessments vary by religious belief.

About Leah Libresco

Leah Anthony Libresco graduated from Yale in 2011. She works as a statistician for a school in Washington D.C. by day, and by night writes for Patheos about theology, philosophy, and math at www.patheos.com/blogs/unequallyyoked. She was received into the Catholic Church in November 2012."

  • Tim

    You’re missing a “the” :p

    • leahlibresco

      Where?

  • Tim

    I concede that I may be embarrassingly mistaken, in which case I shall blame the idiosyncrasies of the Australian dialect, but shouldn’t the definite article precede “worldview” in your amended question?

    • leahlibresco

      No, no, you’re quite correct.

  • http://prodigalnomore.wordpress.com/ The Ubiquitous

    I’m not sure “compelling” will fix the issue of boring or dull answers. Why not simply replace “compelling” with:

    Is this a boring or dull answer?

    It doesn’t hurt to be direct about what you’re trying to measure, does it?

    • deiseach

      Yes, but just because something is boring or dull doesn’t mean it isn’t correct or right. I mean, a legal decision could be the most boring document in the world to try and read through, but if it’s correct in its interpretation of the law, then that’s the precedent and not the more exciting, lively and interesting but wrong argument.

      I see “compelling” here as “this argument is convincing or not easily refutable” not “wow, this is so sparkly and shiny, I just have to like it!”


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X