(no title)
shardo | 8 years ago
Do you think speculation on things that are an inferential step[1](or a couple of steps) away from things you currently know could be a gauge of a person's innate intelligence?
Intelligence is required to make inferences. Assuming a common starting ground, a person who could make the most logical inferences from it to explain a result would suggest that he's smarter. I do not claim to say a person who makes 10 good points is less smart than someone who makes 11 good points. But he surely you can agree that a person who is able to make 0 inferences is likelier to be less intelligent than someone who makes a hundred.
[1] Where my idea of inferential step is taken from - http://lesswrong.com/lw/kg/expecting_short_inferential_dista...
kobeya|8 years ago
No, I do not. It introduces a large capacity for things to go wrong, and it is very difficult for the interviewer to separate themselves from process. Speculative development is a road marked by dozens or hundreds of failed efforts before you hit on success. Either the interviewee happens to hit upon one of the few "correct" answers in the time available -- password guessing -- or some tolerance of wrong answers is to be accepted. But it is quite difficult to differentiate bad speculation from fruitless speculation, in a way that usefully differentiates candidates based on capability.