superrific
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 4,037
It's a lazy Friday and the board has been boring for a while, so I'm hoping this can spice things up. I was thinking this morning about detailed, operational definitions of words. By operational, I mean a set of considerations that would define X as an objective test that can tell you whether something is X and how much it is X. I discussed some concepts with ChatGPT and it would be interesting to compare the super-ChatGPT analysis with the ZZLP analysis.
This is better explained with an example, which can also be our first exercise as a warmup for harder things. Define lazy. This was my initial prompt to ChatGPT:
By deeply define, I mean something sort of like an operational definition. Let's say we are trying to define "lazy." The goal is to identify a set of conditions that are required for a person to be considered lazy, and rank them in importance. Also conditions that aren't strictly speaking required, but contribute to the overall laziness assessment, and also conditions that are inconsistent with laziness -- whether the inconsistency is tension or flat out contradiction.
We're also trying to expunge analogy or metaphor to the extent possible. So let me give an example for "lazy." The essence of laziness is having no energy, right? Not for this task. "Having no energy" is a metaphor. The essence of laziness is a general reluctance to engage in taxing activity, physical or mental. But it's not the same as irresponsibility, so the lazy person mentally distinguishes the things that need to get done (which they will do, often promptly) and things that are merely good to do, in which case the lazy person will prefer inaction. It's also not principled. If I say, "I don't want to do any work in the morning because I often have headaches and it sets up my day better to goof off before noon," that's not really laziness, is it? Now, often lazy people will try to couch their laziness as a matter of principle with excuses, but if the principles were very good they wouldn't need so many. So lazy people often have "principles" that justify their inactivity but the principles are poorly reasoned, contradictory or simply lack credibility (if for instance the lazy person claims to care about something that is implausible that they would care about). But this isn't a required trait for laziness. Lazy people also procrastinate frequently, but laziness isn't the same as procrastination. For instance, I am not lazy; I am constantly active mentally if not physically, and rarely have "down" moments when I'm not thinking about something. But I also tend to put things off until they need to be done, which means that I usually have a big pile of work to get through. But I'm also usually working; I've just allowed the buildup of a queue of tasks. So while procrastination is related to laziness, it's again a non-required factor. Is this a good analysis?
After the conversation, ChatGPT and I agreed on a ranking of the laziness of the following three fictional characters: Garfield the cat, The Dude, and Homer Simpson. That assessment was made by looking at four factors that we considered relevant to the determination and in something of an order of importance. I'm curious how the ZZLP will rank them and why.
This is better explained with an example, which can also be our first exercise as a warmup for harder things. Define lazy. This was my initial prompt to ChatGPT:
By deeply define, I mean something sort of like an operational definition. Let's say we are trying to define "lazy." The goal is to identify a set of conditions that are required for a person to be considered lazy, and rank them in importance. Also conditions that aren't strictly speaking required, but contribute to the overall laziness assessment, and also conditions that are inconsistent with laziness -- whether the inconsistency is tension or flat out contradiction.
We're also trying to expunge analogy or metaphor to the extent possible. So let me give an example for "lazy." The essence of laziness is having no energy, right? Not for this task. "Having no energy" is a metaphor. The essence of laziness is a general reluctance to engage in taxing activity, physical or mental. But it's not the same as irresponsibility, so the lazy person mentally distinguishes the things that need to get done (which they will do, often promptly) and things that are merely good to do, in which case the lazy person will prefer inaction. It's also not principled. If I say, "I don't want to do any work in the morning because I often have headaches and it sets up my day better to goof off before noon," that's not really laziness, is it? Now, often lazy people will try to couch their laziness as a matter of principle with excuses, but if the principles were very good they wouldn't need so many. So lazy people often have "principles" that justify their inactivity but the principles are poorly reasoned, contradictory or simply lack credibility (if for instance the lazy person claims to care about something that is implausible that they would care about). But this isn't a required trait for laziness. Lazy people also procrastinate frequently, but laziness isn't the same as procrastination. For instance, I am not lazy; I am constantly active mentally if not physically, and rarely have "down" moments when I'm not thinking about something. But I also tend to put things off until they need to be done, which means that I usually have a big pile of work to get through. But I'm also usually working; I've just allowed the buildup of a queue of tasks. So while procrastination is related to laziness, it's again a non-required factor. Is this a good analysis?
After the conversation, ChatGPT and I agreed on a ranking of the laziness of the following three fictional characters: Garfield the cat, The Dude, and Homer Simpson. That assessment was made by looking at four factors that we considered relevant to the determination and in something of an order of importance. I'm curious how the ZZLP will rank them and why.