This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.
I tested 3 examples:
1 - 2 - 4
6 - 12 - 24
38 - 76 - 152
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
The problem is if someone asks a question, I answer, and they say CORRECT!, I have no real reason to keep guessing. That's a waste of time.This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
Got it -- suck it, NYT!
Not sure if this is intended as a joke.The problem is if someone asks a question, I answer, and they say CORRECT!, I have no real reason to keep guessing. That's a waste of time.This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
Yeah, I did about 10.I'm sure the number of responses tested to show you know the rule says a lot about someone. Some may test 1 or 2 responses before giving an answer. I did 7.
You got the whole actual rule or just you got a "yes"?Harumph. I got it on the first try with 6-8-12.
This is exactly the point. You were just asking stuff to confirm what you thought you already knew. You weren't asking sequences that might disprove your initial hypothesis.They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no?
I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.
I tested 3 examples:
1 - 2 - 4
6 - 12 - 24
38 - 76 - 152
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.
How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.
then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.
Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
Oh, you are being sarcastic? I would guess almost everyone got it "right" on their first trio of numbers.johnnycakes said:I got a yes a bunch of times with different numbers so I think I know the rule.You got the whole actual rule or just you got a "yes"?Harumph. I got it on the first try with 6-8-12.
I think your reply says a lot.How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.
then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.
Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
That's right. First try. Can I claim a 175 IQ now?Oh, you are being sarcastic? I would guess almost everyone got it "right" on their first trio of numbers.johnnycakes said:I got a yes a bunch of times with different numbers so I think I know the rule.You got the whole actual rule or just you got a "yes"?Harumph. I got it on the first try with 6-8-12.
I think your reply says a lot.How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.
then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.
Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
The simple rule is the numbers must increase. Nothing more, nothing less.
I didn't. That's why I said I guessed.How did you know that they could be negative, or that the second number couldn't be smaller than the first?I tried 2 3 5 and it worked. That tested the doubling, even numbers, and all odd/all even.
then I tried 1 5 3 and it didn't work.
Then I guessed that they have to get bigger.
That really should have been the only correct answer.I got it right 6 times in a row
(I just kept putting in 2-4-8)
I think the point was, most people only look for information that confirms their idea. It did not enter your mind to test alternative theories and challenge your own ideas.I'm not totally sure how this proves the point, although me arguing with the explanation probably inherently does.
I tested 3 examples:
1 - 2 - 4
6 - 12 - 24
38 - 76 - 152
They were all right and confirmed my guess as to what the rule was. It wasn't the actual rule, but what does that have to do with not wanting to hear no? When I clicked that I think I know it, there was no response that I was incorrect or anything like that.