concrete operational stage-deductive reasoning

[lordcalvert1]

holy shit why is that 15 year old on here?

[dannyd0994]

LOL. i just hit a glass with a feather, and it broke..

[theazn07]

oh man that 2nd person was huge lol

[theendofreality17]

This is not deductive reasoning. It is inductive reasoning.

[MrSyntheticDesign]

i wonder how psychology fits into this phrase "Which weighs more? a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers" :D

[theazn07]

@MrSyntheticDesign it doesn't lol it's just a trick phrase lol cuz ppl automatically think of feathers as lighter than bricks without even thinking of the "ton" :P

[WAG1FAM11]

She needs to learn how to speak english LOOL WTF IS SHE SAYING.

and i still dont understand the feather thing?....

[dannyd0994]

@WAG1FAM11 i think you need to learn how to understand english

[Miikaika25]

I did not hear the lady say anything about following a rule, she just made a statement. So the boy is in piagets concrete stage and the girl is in abstract reasoning stage?

[londonwelshboy]

Also - the boy is engaging in a form of automatic processing; his world schema says that a feather will not break a glass. As he is can only engage in concrete operations rather than abstract ones, the automatic processing overrides the scenario presented to him and he does not reason his way through it

[londonwelshboy]

We need to view the video within the context of the experiment. Its designed to test the participants' ability to use abstract and deductive reasoning. The researcher requires the participants to follow the rules/premises. The girl knows that hitting a glass with a feather will not break the glass. BUT the RULE states that a feather will break the glass. The girl knows the difference between the real world and the rule.She demonstrates abstract reasoning.The boy does not.

[Typhoon792]

The kid is smarter than whoever made the rule, lol.

[lupa559]

reading the comments from people who clearly don't understand this video makes me lose faith in humanity.

[crumpetgirl]

@lupa559 LOL

[fight2Bfree]

yeah.. kinda like Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, we should go to war. Why should we go to war? Because Saddam has weapons of mass destruction... makes perfect sense.

[Mama24kiddies]

the kids were told to FOLLOW the rules, so the girl was correct, becasue she followed the rules....the little boy was using common sense, and he was told to FOLLOW the rules, so he was wrong. It shows that cognitively, the child is not able to think logically yet:)

[ujjain5]

Depending how the girl interprets the question, she is either right or wrong.

[piichyan]

this was really helpful :)

[0206jhuna]

ano 3SED-1 you would you agree with the black girl? hahah dec.13-10

[motortube64]

i would rather trust the kid

[jyojyoti]

thanks

[WillyStern]

I think she displays more advanced thinking--IF she isn’t mentally delayed (diction & affect leave us wondering). If she's MR or simply accepts the rule uncritically, then her response doesn’t show intellectual maturity.

Now, if she KNOWS feathers don’t break glasses, but is willing to engage in the thought expt. posited by the premise, she’s advanced.

The boy argues with the feather-can-break-glass premise. He’s right (it defies logic & experience), but perhaps intellectually inflexible.

[GoodOldAnime]

Deductive Reasoning can be very useful if your good with logic. If your good with logic, you should be able to have some "usage" with deductive reasoning. Deductive AND In-deductive Reasoning are both very interesting..

[MTAllenby]

I think a really useful point from this experiment is that quite often a parent will say to a chilld of 5 "If you hadn't gone into the kitchen when I told you not to you would not have broken the glass" and then freak because the child says "But I did go into the kitchen." Children under the age of 8 or 9 really struggle with counter-factual statements.

[IAmbivalanceI]

Quid Pro Quo.....If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, and quacks like a duck .....Then it must be a duck. A rose by any other name smells as sweet. S--- by any other name still stinks. 1+1=2 except if you are talking about humans, cats or cockroaches. If you give away all the money in the Federal Reserve to 3rd world nations, it doesn't make them wealthy. It only makes America broke.

[dubified89]

@IAmbivalanceI except that that's not what happens

[blackword147]

@IAmbivalanceI whats the business with this and the 3rd world,you foolish people always think you all super power in this world,you are a very crazy person

[Ejak2021]

If the feather is from Zapados, then it will break!

I think people would understand the point of this better if they had an accompanying excerpt from a book or the whole video. Another example is if you ask a child in this stage of development "what if the sky were purple?" They'll answer "the sky isn't purple!" They can't think in abstracts/hypotheticals; that's what this is about.

[Masterwow123]

How are you people not grasping this...

The question wasn't "IS THIS TRUE?"

The answers to the questions are based on the questions premises.

It's not based on reality it's based on hypothetical premises which are to be taken as true for the results of the test.

In both scenarios, based on the premises, the glass will break.

[sadamdelfin]

based from my understanding on the hammer and feather rule, the glass didn't break on both rules because the rules say that "if you hit the glass with......... the glass will break" and "Dont hit the glass with .......". The woman ask "What happened to the glass?" not "What will happen to glass if you hit with ........." so the answer will be nothing because she didnt say that she did something to the glass, right?

[sadamdelfin]

based from my understanding on the hammer and feather rule, the glass didn't break on both rules because the rules say that "if you hit the glass with......... the glass will break" and "Dont hit the glass with .......". The woman ask "What happened to the glass?" not "What will happen to glass if you hit with ........." so the answer will be nothing because she didnt say that she did something to the glass, right?

[Ssadriu]

No no no! You Shouldn't follow the Rule, but the Logic.

If i said "2+2=3" and i asked you what 2+2 is, would you answer 3, or the more Logic answer? Which is 4.

[Vyroglyph]

the boy does not violate deductive reasoning

[Th3DarkM3]

Well if your holding the feather at its tip and hit it with a glass, the glass wont break. But if the feather is on a solid surface and you hit it with a glass, the glass will break. And yes she stated the basic definition of deductive reasoning in some form. The women said the rule is you hit it with a glass, the glass will break. Meaning the feather is on a solid surface, and "you hit the feather with a glass, he glass will break" is a fact/rule we base our other asumptions on.

[DrQu4ntum]

@Th3DarkM3 Couldnt have said it better my self :)

[j0sephmercado3]

The best answer is the answer by the older person, this is because that she assumes that the previous evidence is true, which clearly states, that "if you hit the glass with a feather it will break". Therefore it will lead her to the conclusion that the glass "broke" when a feather hit it. Hence deductive reasoning as says in the title above the video.

Although through empirical thinking there are many variables in play in this situation. The feather's hardness or the glass' sturdiness.

[cwashi51]

oh wow

[AnEscapedMind]

LOL...she isn't bright.

[SuperXtan]

tahat what piaget said

^^

[fracturegang1]

Can one say what the girl told?

[kiminokami]

The girl sounds and looks like she just wants to please the instructor and get through whatever this test is as quickly as possible.

[Meddlmoe]

they are both wrong: the right answer is "i don't know"

reason: she said "if YOU hit a glass... "

so there is no information given about what happens, if dawn hits a glas.

the boy replaced the missing information with his experience so hes more right. And he is a critical thinker.

A Similar test in german would probably produce different results, because we often use the equivalent to "if"not in its strict sense: "Wenn du nicht aufpasst, wirst du dir weh tun" e.g.

[zacharij7]

you're wrong.. its about not relying on personal experiences and being about think abstractly by following premises.

[Meddlmoe]

however these premises are not set universial, so the universal context can only be taken from experience.

[zacharij7]

irrelevant. the stage demands children to distance personal experience from premises or 'rules'. you are missing the point here mate.

[Meddlmoe]

those demands are in your imagination, which you as a spectator derived from experience.

In that case these rules must be told. however they were not, so the "rules" could only be derived from personal experience,too.

This study is simply flawed. This test can not determine the childrens ability to abstract thought, because the children did not know the verbal cue, that the questions were abstract questions. The only thing this test can determine, is the ability to recognize this verbal cue.

[Meddlmoe]

furthermore, even if these demands and rules had beed expressed, a question with an answer outside the set premises can't be answerd with abstract reasoning, so the answer should be "i don't know", because there is no abstract information given about what happens when dawn does something. But she clearly demands an answer, so the answer can only be derived from experience.

[zacharij7]

it seems someone hasnt reached formal operation yet..

[mikjar10]

@zacharij7 If we can't think for ourselves, if we're unwilling to question authority, then we're just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us.

[Wisdombluetooth]

the children have a more inocnet view of things, less logic but more inocent..

[magiccatalyst]

cute kid - smart. Doesn't follow the rules like the older kid.

[Johndoe024]

Is that fat monkey chick retarded?? A feather break a glass??? I think she forgot to put her helmet on for the video.

[moviefreak316]

you really shouldn't make assumptions before you know the truth. you also shouldn't call people fat monkeys either. grow up a little bit.

[judeblues86]

The rule was:

If you hit a glass with a feather it will break

What happens when dawn hits a glass with a feather. answer= it breaks

You are actually the retarded one loser.

[Meddlmoe]

what happens when YOU do something does not predict what happens when somebody else does it (in a strict logical sense)

[acebrawler73]

she said if thats the rule. Of course you and me know that according to the rules of physics it likely won't break but if the rule was that a feather would break a glass then the glass would break whe you hit it.

[chisaoboy]

@acebrawler73 You're absolutely right. The rule was given. The experimenter didn't say, "Of course, in real life this wouldn't happen, but...."

[cutieyati]

that kid is smart!!!

!that girl is not so smart.

[manwithaplan721]

@cutieyati Actually, the girl is kind of right. The woman said if she hits the glass with the feather, it WILL break. The second card said the she hit the glass with the feather. The first card said what will happen to the glass if it is hit with the feather. The second card explained the action. She did hit the glass with the feather. I mean, we all know that a feather cannot break a glass, but she said it broke because she is explaining exactly what happened to the glass if it gets his.

[mebbmebbmibbmibb]

tisk tisk

[AttemptingReason]

The girl looked a little skeptical. You can tell there was conflict between her intuition and her knowledge of the "rules" that governed the question. Very cool.

[moviefreak316]

I think that would be shown by anybody because unless you have a freaking amazing feather the glass will not break. I am not a fan of this video because it uses completely different age groups. They should just have tried a couple of years apart.

[AttemptingReason]

It would have been good if they could show a fine dividing line between the age where the kids start to "get it" and when they don't, but I think it still serves to illustrate that full logical capabilities take time to develop.

[xxJellycikxx]

LOL

[RipPhilOdonnell]

it depends if the feather is on a surface

[dxribb]

duh....

[metallion25]

never overthink, keep it simple :)

[Tehn00bifierer]

It's not over thinking, It's Logic. People need to see when they use information as a "tool" or use it as a "source" the child used logic as a source, common knowledge, feathers don't break glass. The woman used it as a tool, because "that's what the card said"

[AnimeHighDefinition]

No it is a logical statement, if P than Q. No personal experience or posteri knowledge is involved. The parameters are within the statement that is being made, not what you 'believe' it to be.

If the premise is true, than the conclusion also has to be true. You are taking it too literally. Also you have a fallacy in your reply by employing ''common knowlefdge'' appeal to population.

[toogood03]

he will grow and be bad too :P

[LTANCELIN]

When are the boys mentally, socially and emotionally matured if they are below 18 ?

[sosemperme81]

Ciaooo!!

I'm Italian student and I've need a text about this video for my research (my English is so poor!!)... who is my hero? 

Thank you very much, Simone.

[scir91]

how is this concrete? the child is not touching or sensing what is happening? sounds more like formal operational as the child is deducing what would happen

[jonahansen]

As depicted, these experiments are not very compelling. There is an overwhelming confound between the kid's concrete knowledge of reality and the abstraction required to test the deductive ability. The examples should use objects and actions that the subjects have no prior knowledge.

[sillydillydokieo]

yup.

[waryuary]

ang kulit pa lang pag-aralan ito!

parang bumalik ako sa pag kabata!",)

LOL! I'm having fun while watching.

I placed my self as a child and I got it!

if I also in their same age

perhaps my answer would be like that!..ROFL!

[hateyousomuch2]

"I knew that too!" LOL, that first kid is so cute and hilarious!

[comp7878]

It would be amazing if his daddy's name was Don, who just happened to break a glass with a hammer. :p

[sara6398]

beyond cute...