Common sense is not that common: a recent study from the University of Pennsylvania concludes the concept is “somewhat illusory.” Researchers collected statements from various sources that had been described as “common sense” and put them to test subjects. The mixed bag of results suggested there was “little evidence that more than a small fraction of beliefs is common to more than a small fraction of people.”
It’s no surprise that there are few universally shared notions of what stands to reason. People took a horse worming drug to cure COVID! They think low-traffic neighborhoods are a communist plot and call the police about KFC running out of chicken! We all think those other guys are the stupid ones.
If you would like to test your own common sense, the Pennsylvania researchers are running an online challenge (commonsense.seas.upenn.edu). Despite dark suspicions about my common sense, I was compelled to try, agreeing or disagreeing with statements, then deciding whether others would think like me.
Photo: EPA-EFE
Some were easy (“No one wants to get ill;” “Glue is sticky”), but some gave ample opportunity to overthink and second guess myself. Surely it isn’t silly to end a marriage if you don’t love someone? Is “loving people more than they deserve” an “aspect of kindness?”
How am I supposed to know anything about the body temperature of cats?
The worst bit was the maths (designed to check if intelligence and common sense are correlated — not particularly, apparently). I’m 49 and haven’t worked out two-thirds of anything since 1992: I had to draw 60 apples to stumble through a simple fraction, guess the full price for a discounted toaster and text my son for help. That exchange ended with me begging him: “Pretend this never happened.”
The verdict? A feeble 53/100 on the “commonsensicality” index (maths score undisclosed). Unwilling to accept my worst mark since year 10 physics, I tried again. And again. By the fifth attempt (yes, a total waste of my time), I had bumped my score up to 97/100. That is a victory for something, but definitely not common sense.
That US assistance was a model for Taiwan’s spectacular development success was early recognized by policymakers and analysts. In a report to the US Congress for the fiscal year 1962, former President John F. Kennedy noted Taiwan’s “rapid economic growth,” was “producing a substantial net gain in living.” Kennedy had a stake in Taiwan’s achievements and the US’ official development assistance (ODA) in general: In September 1961, his entreaty to make the 1960s a “decade of development,” and an accompanying proposal for dedicated legislation to this end, had been formalized by congressional passage of the Foreign Assistance Act. Two
Despite the intense sunshine, we were hardly breaking a sweat as we cruised along the flat, dedicated bike lane, well protected from the heat by a canopy of trees. The electric assist on the bikes likely made a difference, too. Far removed from the bustle and noise of the Taichung traffic, we admired the serene rural scenery, making our way over rivers, alongside rice paddies and through pear orchards. Our route for the day covered two bike paths that connect in Fengyuan District (豐原) and are best done together. The Hou-Feng Bike Path (后豐鐵馬道) runs southward from Houli District (后里) while the
March 31 to April 6 On May 13, 1950, National Taiwan University Hospital otolaryngologist Su You-peng (蘇友鵬) was summoned to the director’s office. He thought someone had complained about him practicing the violin at night, but when he entered the room, he knew something was terribly wrong. He saw several burly men who appeared to be government secret agents, and three other resident doctors: internist Hsu Chiang (許強), dermatologist Hu Pao-chen (胡寶珍) and ophthalmologist Hu Hsin-lin (胡鑫麟). They were handcuffed, herded onto two jeeps and taken to the Secrecy Bureau (保密局) for questioning. Su was still in his doctor’s robes at
Mirror mirror on the wall, what’s the fairest Disney live-action remake of them all? Wait, mirror. Hold on a second. Maybe choosing from the likes of Alice in Wonderland (2010), Mulan (2020) and The Lion King (2019) isn’t such a good idea. Mirror, on second thought, what’s on Netflix? Even the most devoted fans would have to acknowledge that these have not been the most illustrious illustrations of Disney magic. At their best (Pete’s Dragon? Cinderella?) they breathe life into old classics that could use a little updating. At their worst, well, blue Will Smith. Given the rapacious rate of remakes in modern
RSS