Asklemmy

56109 readers

125 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS

-15

Could we replace college with something like Chess or Go, for general intelligence requirements? (feddit.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by ki4jgt@feddit.org to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

With the general inaccessibility of college in the US (with AGI, they're basically pay to play), would Chess or Go be a good qualifier for job mental acuity?

Both can be monitored on the spot and certified by third-party associations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I disagree that college does that, but different experiences I suppose. If you want to improve college, how does admitting people based on a game improve things?

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org -1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm not admitting people to college based on a game. I'm saying, as far as general education goes, such games demonstrate a pattern of dedication. And would be a perfect comparable skill for those who cannot afford college.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The trouble is you can have a kid who's parents taught them chess and all they focused on was the proper moves by rote. And that kid can be shit at everything else in life.

Graduating college is less about finding the right answer, but knowing how to get to that answer and why you pick a certain method over other things. Its why the profs hound people to show their work in a problem.

I had a programmer dude working for us, he would achieve results but he (and we) never quite knew if they were valid because he had a hard time explaining how he got to certain assumptions. He had no formal college training, he just picked up stuff quickly by trial and error. It was suggested to him he go back and take a programming basics course to get the fundamentals down on how and why of projects, but he didn't see the value in doinf it, but everyone else he reported to could see the gaps in reasoning.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Then they would still fare poorly against those who both excel at chess and have gone to college.

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think that's how skills work.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

Let's say you get your wish and everyone is judged on their ability to play chess. You now have two prospective employees for an administrative role and both have a similar chess rating. Which of their other skills or achievements are you going to factor when making your decision?