RE: RE: The secret of motivation. Part 1. “$” vs. “for fun”. #1 “Candle problem"
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The secret of motivation. Part 1. “$” vs. “for fun”. #1 “Candle problem"

Words
412
Reading
2 min
Listen
Play
6y

yes, I guess not everything is clear in the "Candle problem" description I provided in the post.

I had similar questions when I tried to solve the problem for the first time.
... if it was okay to destroy the wall with the thumb tacks,... etc.

And I didn't solve it by myself. Only after I saw the solution.

the original problem has been modified by other researches.
just in case, here's the original problem (as per Duncker, K, 1945):

We experimented with all sorts of objects in daily use (e.g., boxes, pliers, etc.), which were first claimed in their usual
function (FJ and then, within the same problem-situation, for a new, unusual function (F2). The crucial object was
each time to be selected as the suitable tool out of a great number of objects which lay in confusion on a table.

The "box problem:" On the door, at the height of the eyes, three small candles are to
be put side by side ("for visual experiments"). On the table lie, among many other objects.
a few tacks and die crucial objects: three little pasteboard boxes (about the size of an
ordinary matchbox, differing somewhat in form and color and put in different places).
Solution: with a tack apiece, the three boxes are fastened to the door, each to serve as
platform for a candle. In the setting a.p., die three boxes were filled with experimental
material: in one there were several thin little candles, tacks in another, and matches in die
third. In w.p., the three boxes were empty. Thus F,: "container"; F»: "platform" (on which to set things).

(source)

"You can use <u> </u> for underlined stuff.."

tried it.
STEMGEEKS shows the message:
"Disable side-by-side editor
Please remove the following HTML elements from your post: <u>"

it seems that neither STEMGEEKS not any other interface like PeakD actually allows to underline the text.
but anyway, that's not really important.

"I can understand the obsession with money seeing as it seems to be needed for everything, otherwise I just find it a real
nuisance at best and unnecessary hindrance at worst for that exact reason"

nicely said.

What do you think, could we one day get rid of this money interface used to decide how resources should be used,
and create an environment where there's no need for the money, the world where people would manage the Earth's resources
without money and politics. That's what J.Fresco suggests to people with his Venus project.
https://www.thevenusproject.com/

@alexbiojs: yes, I guess | Ecency