Important Philosophical Questions + POLLS

General Chat
1737

In the book Sapiens, it’s argued that (paraphrasing) forming social bonds through communication is what set us apart from all other species. This includes the ability to gossip (= sharing information about who is a threat), and to form alliances with another group to stand stronger.

This is a more distinctive trait than using tools, because many species do that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_non-humans

Combining these two traits: humans are superior in tool-use compared to animals, but, apart from our intelligence, that is because we are much better at communicating to each other which tools work best.

5 Likes
1738

Don’t forget our great effectiveness in using projectiles.

3 Likes
1739

I thought monkeys can also do that. At least that’s what I learnt from the xx of the planet of the apes movies.

1 Like
1740

Humans smart. Apes still waiting for lab-grown virus to catch up

also, are monkeys part of planet of the apes?

1 Like
1741

What does being “overqualified for a job” you applied for even mean? :thinking:

The more I think about it, the more it seems like a very inane concept which is just being said because people have agreed that it is “a thing”, but it makes no sense.

1 Like
1742

Does he really believe that? If true, then, from all I have learned about animal cognition in the past 30 years I’d think that Yuval Noah Harari has missed all these newer findings about non-human animals.

1 Like
1743

I believe at the point of its inception, it was something like

“you’re applying at our cafe even though you just finished an engineering degree, we don’t want to waste two weeks training you if you are likely to get an engineering job in a month and then we have to hire again”

However, I agree it is overused now, perhaps as a “safe” excuse when you cannot confess the real reasons you didn’t want to hire the person.

4 Likes
1744

Seems optimistic

5 Likes
1745

The phrase comes from a simpler time :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes
1746

Jobs have qualifications. If you (greatly) surpass those qualifications, you are overqualified, right?

2 Likes
1747

Yeah, but the oddness comes from it being not just used as a negative, but used as a reason for rejection

2 Likes
1748

When you write about a matchup such as Player A VS Player B, which way do you write?

  • Black player VS White player
  • White player VS Black player
  • Other logic (underdog VS favourite etc)
  • No specific logic
0 voters
2 Likes
1749

i normally default to Black - White, but then backtrack and write White - Black because that’s how i normally see it in professional publications and videos lol

2 Likes
1750

I may use alphabetical order

Or a dice

2 Likes
1751

That’s interesting. I wonder if it comes from chess…

1 Like
1752

I see

  • White vs. Black in: KGS, IGS, Fox, Tygem, pairing program Opengotha
  • Black vs. White in: OGS, go4go.net

Black vs. White makes more sense because Black plays first but on the other hand, White is traditionally the strongest/senior player.

5 Likes
1753

I’m not sure at all that there are so many links between both. Different history and cultures as a first thing.

1754

Yeah probably this is a better explanation

1 Like
1755

That makes some sense, but it is a very niche/rare case, compared to this concept becoming almost a world-wide HR dogma.

That seems to be its only use now, but I still do not understand how is this useful or even reasonable, even in this case where it is “just an excuse”. There are so many other useful and factual things you could claim to not hire someone. After all, you do not owe anyone a job, it is your decision to hire candidate A and not candidate B. Why not be professional about it and actually tell them why?

Yes, that is the definition of the term, but that’s the crux of my question. What does that mean practically and why is it pertinent to not hiring someone?

Supposing that I have a PhD in chemistry, for example, and I no longer want to work in research or a lab or think that a change of pace to something easier would be good for my health and I apply for a teaching position at a highschool and they tell you “sorry, we won’t hire you because you are overqualified”. That’s MY problem and decision.

If I applied for this job this means three things:
a) I want this position
b) I probably know that I can do this job easily, exactly because I am overqualified
c) I would expect that the employer would jump at the opportunity to hire an overqulified person, while paying the wages for a lower earning position.

This is like going to eat to a small restaurant and you find Gordon Ramsay is cooking there today, but the prices are the same.

Any reasonable person would go:
“Hey, we have a great chance to enjoy a meal made by Gordon Ramsay and not pay extra. How lucky we are!”
However, HR would go:
“Gordon Ramsay is overqualified for this restaurant, we will have to go eat elsewhere and pay the same price for worse food.”

Make that make sense. :sweat_smile:

In any other instance you can think of in the comparison:
Option A has: X quality, Y quantity at Z price
VS
Option B has: double X quality, Y quantity at Z price

Any sane person would choose option B, but, apparently, not HR.

Would you buy furniture made by a master carpenter or an apprentice, if the price was the same?
Would you call a plumber with 25 years of experience to fix your plumbing or an apprentice, if the price was the same?
Would you hire an architect with 25 years of experience to design your house or an apprentice, if the price was the same?

And so forth… anywhere else, being overqualified is a good thing. As it should be.

1 Like
1756

Probably because of the past influence of japanese go culture which I guess put a lot of importance on this things like politeness.