Quiz questions: Difference between revisions
More actions
Winstonyin (talk | contribs) |
Winstonyin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
Comments | Comments | ||
== | == Singular and general causation == | ||
'''Relevant topic(s):''' [[11.1 Singular and General Causation]] | '''Relevant topic(s):''' [[11.1 Singular and General Causation]] | ||
Revision as of 16:15, 13 January 2022
Fact or value
Relevant topic(s): 1.1 Introduction and When Is Science Relevant
In an international forum on climate change, the following statements are made by various parties across the globe. Identify if each of these statements is a claim of fact or a claim of value.
- Leader of a major first world country: “The current change in global climate is not caused by humans.” (Fact/Value)
- A climate activist: “A world whose economy is built around environmental consciousness rather than corporate greed is a world that’s worth living in.” (Fact/Value)
- An economist: “By my conservative estimate, the clean energy sector will create 1 million jobs within the next two years.” (Fact/Value)
- An industry lobbyist: “More than half the population would prioritise maintaining job security over reducing the risks of climate change.” (Fact/Value)
Genetic engineering conference
Relevant topic(s): 1.2 Shared Reality
At a conference on genetic engineering, two panelists, Dr. Hallstein and Dr. Yamazawa, are having a heated debate over the effectiveness of gene editing of mosquitos in reducing the spread of malaria. Dr. Hallstein thinks the approach can drastically reduce disease spread, whereas Dr. Yamazawa argues that it has negligible effect. How can the attendees of the conference decide who is correct in reality? Choose one.
- They cannot. Both panelists are correct to themselves, and they should agree to disagree.
- The attendees should take a vote. The claim receiving more than 50% of the votes is the correct one.
- They should defer to the most reputable senior scientist at the conference.
- They cannot yet, but they can continue to gather more evidence to see which opinion is more likely to be correct.
Question title
Relevant topic(s): 1.1 Introduction and When Is Science Relevant
- Some question
- Option
- Option
Comments
Question title
Relevant topic(s): 1.1 Introduction and When Is Science Relevant
- Some question
- Option
- Option
Comments
Question title
Relevant topic(s): 1.1 Introduction and When Is Science Relevant
- Some question
- Option
- Option
Comments
Singular and general causation
Relevant topic(s): 11.1 Singular and General Causation
From the following statements, select the one(s) that is/are about general causation.
- The El Dorado wildfire in 2020 was caused by a smoke bomb at a gender reveal party.
- Ariel’s back injury was caused by lifting heavy weights with bad posture at the gym earlier today.
- Inhalation of radon from radioactive minerals underground is the second leading cause of lung cancer.
- A reduction in gun violence can be achieved by requiring gun owners to first take and pass a safety and competency test.
- Chantelle’s award of a special exploratory grant enabled her discovery of a new molecule.
Wisdom of crowds
Relevant topic(s): 12.1 Wisdom of Crowds and Herd Thinking
In which of the following scenarios would you expect the “wisdom of crowds” effect to have the largest positive impact on the result (i.e. to get closer to the true answer)? Estimating the heaviest recorded weight of a pumpkin in a large college classroom by having the students shout their own guesses one after another
- Estimating the number of traffic lights in San Francisco by selecting a random sample of the US population, having them discuss the question in groups, and then averaging their individual guesses
- Estimating the height of the empire state building by selecting a random group of university students, and having them discuss the question and agree on a collective guess
- Estimating the largest recorded weight of a tiger by selecting a random sample of the world population, and having them discuss the question in groups and agree on a collective guess
- Estimating the height of the tallest tree in the US by selecting a large, random sample of the US population and averaging their individual guesses
High-speed rail
Relevant topic(s): 12.2 Denver Bullet Study
Suppose you are a government official tasked with developing a plan for a new high-speed railway system across your country. Several foreign countries, including China, France, Germany, and Japan, have already offered development plans using their own high-speed rail technology under significant foreign investment. You have also thought about developing the system entirely domestically to boost the national economy, but this will certainly take longer than foreign development plans.
You remember Prof. Campbell’s lecture on the Denver bullet study from your days at Berkeley and hope to use it to make a decision by integrating facts and values.
- Name two factors or features of the high-speed rail plans that will play a significant role in the decision making process.
Total cost, speed, comfort for passengers, economic benefit, jobs added, environmental impact, etc - Name two stakeholders and two types of experts for this situation.
Stakeholders: construction workers, citizens living along the railway path. Experts: railroad engineers, economists. Or anything reasonable. - Briefly explain how the Denver bullet study technique produces or outputs a final decision on the optimal high-speed railway plan.
Stakeholders evaluate the relative importance of items in part (1), and experts independently evaluate how well each rail construction plan achieves each of the factors/features. The stakeholders' scores are multiplied with the corresponding experts' scores, and then summed up. (Final score is the average of the experts' scores, weighted by the stakeholders' scores.