I posted an ad on Craigslist offering $20 to the person who provided the best answers. There were only 4 responses and only 2 serious responses. The two serious responses were very good. No one had all the right answers but the winner and the runner up both demonstrated some understanding of the concepts which was exciting to me.
Winner of the $20 Christian Olmos
The subconscious mind determines the value of an act by the anticipated feeling (or the avoidance of a feeling) said act will produce in consideration of the energy required to complete the act. The subconscious mind asks, “Is the value supplied by the act greater than the energy required to complete?”
The act also becomes a question of the value of the act versus the value of anchoring objectives. If there’s a consequence to anchoring objectives, probability of consequence is considered, followed by severity.
Lastly, value is filtered by morality. There will be a negative feeling imposed when a person commits a morally wrong act, reducing self worth. As stated, the decision making process is value versus energy, consequence and morality.
ORION Response: 1: Is correct the anticipated feelings an act produces is what determines the value of an act.
C) Since there is no expectation for compensation for performing the act, I will help because it will make me feel good. Hence, the value supplied by the act is greater than the energy required to complete the act
ORION RESPONSE: 2a: Is correct, considering the items to be moved and temperature of moving the items is conscious acknowledgement of the energy required.
2b: is correct. Thoughts pertaining to how your friend will feel for you helping will cause you to feel good and supply’s value for the act.
2c: Is correct, based on only these two pieces of information, whether the person will help is determined by the height of the value versus depth of the energy required to complete the act.
3.The skateboarder will proceed with the attempt because the probability of him landing without injury are high since he has many years of practice.
Severity is not considered since probability of falling is too low.
The value of the immediate act would be the euphoria from landing the difficult trick versus the value of continuing to skateboard without injuries.
When all of this is considered, the skateboarder proceeded with his attempt because he’s highly skilled, has done it before and there’s no point in skateboarding if you’re not going to risk it all to land an awesome trick.
ORION RESPONSE: Using each component of consequence, explain why the skateboarder will proceed with the attempt. Probability of the outcome, severity of the outcome, and how the value of the immediate act could be greater than the value of the anchoring value.
A: Your answer for 3a is not altogether incorrect although you added some information that wasn’t supplied in the question. All I was looking for was the Skateboarder will proceed with the act if he believes the probability of the consequence is low.
B: On B I was looking for an answer in isolation from questions A. It is correct that severity is not considered or doesn’t weigh into the decision-making process if the probability of the consequence is low. I’m more appreciative of you demonstrating that understanding than I am of the correct answer. The correct answer, presuming on a fair probability of injury, is the skateboarder will proceed with the trick if he believes the severity of the consequence (in this case injury) is low, or he doesn’t believe the injury he is likely to sustain will be very serious.
C: Is correct. The value of the difficult trick is higher than skateboarding without performing such tricks, and worth the risk even if he sustains an injury that temporarily prevents him from accessing that recurring valued objective (skateboarding).
4.When I had to decide whether to move to the west coast in Las Vegas for a job opportunity or stay in Florida.
The energy required to complete the act was worth the value of the act. I imagined myself making great money and experiencing new adventures. The move was going to be all paid for so I didn’t need money to make it happen. Canceling my current lease, packing and driving across the country seemed tough but the value was worth the effort.
The consequences would be that I fail at this job and then I’m stuck in Las Vegas with no job, friends or family. But the probability of that was low, since I have experience in my line of work. So severity was not taken under consideration since I was extremely optimistic. I would no longer see my family which is an important anchoring objective for me but I knew that if I had the chance of making a lot more money, the value that would bring to my life would outweigh the fact that I wouldn’t see them often.
I felt morally wrong to abandon my family but after a long time contemplating the idea, the value of the act was justified in the long run.
ORION RESPONSE: The explanation of your decision to move to Vegas, the details of that decision and your ability to recognize how these details represent components of the decision-making process is spot on. I do suspect some of the components you mention were included to answer the question thoroughly and were not seriously considered or didn’t carry much weight in your decision to take advantage of the opportunity. For example, I don’t think the energy required to relocate was much of an actual factor in your decision. Sure, you thought about it but I suspect this was more a matter of function, in how you were going to move, and less considering the effort as a negative against the value of the opportunity. More important than the actual weight any these factors carried at the time of your decision, is you demonstrate a thorough understanding of decision-making process, which is very impressive and gives me a reason to be optimistic.
5.Time is not an element of the decision making process because unless you change the way of thinking, consider the consequences or find the effort placed in a particular act to be worthwhile, it doesn’t matter how long it takes you to decide. The subconscious does not think in terms of time.
ORION RESPONSE I didn’t expect anyone to answer this question correctly but I did expect more resistance to the premise of the question since we often think we don’t have time to do things. The reason time is not an element of the decision-making process is because the time it takes to complete an objective is only relevant if we have a higher valued objective to complete. It becomes the value of the immediate objective versus the value of whatever scheduled objective the immediate objective interferes with.
Runner Up Jullian Villanueva
1. By anticipating the Value
ORION Response: 1: The subconscious perception of value or the worth of an object or an act is measured in the feelings the act or object produces. What you do is based on the feelings you anticipate an objective will produce. This is based on experience, where sensations you’ve experienced through acts determine the value for the act and objects. Acts where there is no experience to determine how they make us feel are anticipated through similar experiences. The correct answer for the first question is feelings. The subconscious perception of value is feelings.
2c. The value supplied by the act would have to be greater than the energy required to complete the act.
ORION RESPONSE: 2a,b, and c, are all correct. I was excited to see these answers.
3a.the skateboarder thought the probability of being hurt was too low to have considered the severity the consequence.
3b. The severity is the length of the hand rail
3c. The value of completing the act could be greater than the anchoring value
ORION RESPONSE: 3a is correct. Even if the skateboarder believes there is a chance that he could experience a severe injury, if he believes the probability of the outcome is low, he will attempt the trick. 3b The severity of the consequence is based on the extent of the injury that the skateboarder believes could occur in attempting the trick. In your answer you stated the length of the handrail represents severity. While the length of the handrail may be a factor in both the probability (longer you have to go the greater chance you’ll fall off) and severity, it is not the only determinant factor. The correct answer is that the skateboarder will proceed with the trick if he believes the severity of the consequence is low. If believes the injury he will sustain in attempting the trick won’t be that bad. 3c is correct. I was looking for more of an explanation in how that value of the immediate act is greater than the value of the anchoring act. Where the feelings associated with performing a dangerous and exhilarating trick is greater than the moderate feelings associated with less dangerous tricks skateboarding. Your answer is still conceptually correct.
4.the thoughts I had while making the decision to complete this “20 dollar question” was did I want to waste my time working on word problems because I hate them. The reason for this is I feel like I struggle with comprehension. But I knew that working on this question would allow me to practice to be better. I feel the value of completing this question was greater than the energy I put in and I knew that I would find value in accomplishing regardless if I got it right or wrong.
ORION RESPONSE: There is negative value in the putting effort into working on word problems. To give you answer 5 in this answer since you stated you didn’t want to “waste your time”, the act of wasting your time is only relevant if you have something better to do. Time is only relevant if there is something we’d rather be doing with that time. Otherwise, if there are no higher valued objectives, the time it takes to complete an objective isn’t a factor. It’s the value of the immediate act versus the value of other acts when we are concerned with the time something will take.
Next you provided an explanation as to why you hate word problems is because you feel you have poor comprehension skills. I would disagree based on your answers because you’ve clearly comprehended most of these concepts very well and you have no frame of reference for anything in this material. This is beyond this lesson but pertains to comprehension. The universe consists of objects in motion measured by time and space. All motion is the effect of a cause. All objects have assignments of cause or effect depending on context. Anything complex is the assembly of basic details in cause-and-effect sequencing. Since all people can understand basic details and assignments of cause and effect all people can understand all things if they are interested in understanding them. Poor comprehension is a product of not being interested in what it is your tasked with comprehending. If you’re interested, the objects (words) that you’re not familiar with you would look up and understand. Then you would assemble the known objects in their appropriate cause and effect sequence and understand the subject. What you cannot comprehend, you choose not to comprehend because you don’t believe there is enough value in the subject to put forth the energy to comprehend it.
One source of value is feelings associated with progress, in this case personal improvement which has value in the feelings it produces. The feelings associated with self-improvement were greater than the anticipated effort required to achieve that improvement. There may have been other motivation influencing the value of the decision but the information you provided and the explanation of the decision-making process based on that information is correct. There shouldn’t be any consequence or moral feelings or thoughts that appear in that decision.
5. It appears to me time does exist. Specifically under consequence. Under the example given being away from our family if we went to jail. I believe we would consider the amount of time we would be away from our family.
ORION RESPONSE: I’ll reiterate what I wrote in 4, where time is a determinant of value, but time itself is not an element. In the example you provided where a crime may be considered based on the amount of time an individual faces represents the severity of consequence. As you mentioned a person may consider the time they’d be away from their family. The severity of the consequence is the amount of time you’d be away from your family. If we return to being at the foot of the canyon, on the other side is your anchoring objective to experience the good feelings that come from being around your family. If it is a year it is like the canyon is 100 feet deep, where if you fall in you are that far away from your family and other objectives that require you to be free. If it is 10 years this is like being 1000 feet deep and being that much further away from your family. In the general context, time is the value of the immediate act versus other acts, since if the value of the immediate act is greater than other objects than you’re not concerned with how much time it takes to complete it.