Q&A: Deception of the Mind
Deception of the Mind
Question
I read in a book by Daniel Kahneman about a method for improving grades without actually improving knowledge. It relies on the heuristics he discovered. He argues that if you start by answering the questions you know best at the beginning of the exam (and not necessarily in their original order), the examiner will judge incomplete answers (those answered at the end) more favorably. Based on the excellent answers at the beginning of the exam, he will assume that the ambiguity and lack are not due to lack of knowledge. The question is whether this counts as deception of the mind. Assuming one uses this tactic to improve a grade without any real basis in knowledge, is this deception of the mind?
It somewhat reminds me of the question about tithing salt (which was asked in order to mislead), but I’m interested in the theoretical aspect of the concept and its boundaries, and I wondered whether there is a connection between the scenario I described and that concept.
Answer
By reasoning alone, I would say there is no prohibition here, since I am using my legitimate tools (like catching a judge on a good day). Certainly, if I am preventing negative biases in the calculation of the grade, that is legitimate.
One thing is clear: if you do this for your own reasons (because it is more convenient for you to answer first what you know well), then there is certainly no prohibition. You are not supposed to give up your own interest in order to spare him biases.
On second thought, it seems to me that this has no connection to deception of the mind. You did not withhold any item of information from him. You simply maneuvered him. That has no connection to the prohibition of deception of the mind. On the parameters of the prohibition of deception of the mind, see my article here:
Thank you very much