Wikipedia defines common sense as “knowledge, judgement, and taste which is more or less universal and which is held more or less without reflection or argument”

Try to avoid using this topic to express niche or unpopular opinions (they’re a dime a dozen) but instead consider provable intuitive facts.

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    48·
    18 days ago

    Pretty much anything related to statistics and probability. People have gut feelings because our minds are really good at finding patterns, but we’re also really good at making up patterns that don’t exist.

    The one people probably have most experience with is the gambler’s fallacy. After losing more than expected, people think they’ll now be more likely to win.

    I also like the Monty Hall problem and the birthday problem.

    • Spyro@lemmy.world
      7·
      18 days ago

      The gambler’s fallacy is pretty easy to get, as is the Monty Hall problem if you restate the question as having 100 doors instead of 3. But for the life of me I don’t think I’ll ever have an intuitive understanding of the birthday problem. That one just boggles my mind constantly.

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        8·
        18 days ago

        Really? The birthday problem is a super simple multiplication, you can do it on paper. The only thing you really need to understand is the inversion of probability (P(A) = 1 - P(not A)).

        The Monty hall problem… I’ve understood it at times, but every time I come back to it I have to figure it out again, usually with help. That shit is unintuitive.

        • Infernal_pizza@lemm.eeEnglish
          2·
          18 days ago

          My favourite explanation of the Monty hall problem is that you probably picked the wrong door as your first choice (because there’s 2/3 chance of it being wrong). Therefore once the third door is removed and you’re given the option to switch you should, because assuming you did pick the wrong door first then the other door has to be the right one

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          1·
          17 days ago

          Adding my own explanation, because I think it clicks better for me (especially when I write it down):

          1. Pick a door. You have a 66% chance of picking a wrong door, and a 33% of picking the right door.
          2. Monty excludes a door with 100% certainty
          3. IF you picked a wrong door, then there’s a 100% chance the remaining door is correct (so the contingent probability is p(switch|picked wrong) = 100%), so the total chance of the remaining door being correct is p(switch|picked wrong)* p(picked wrong) = 66%.
          4. IF you picked the right door, then Monty’s reveal gives you no new information, because both the other doors were wrong, so p(switch|picked right) = 50%, which means that p(switch|picked right) * p(picked right) = 50% * 33% = 17%.
          5. p(don't switch|picked wrong) * p(picked wrong) = 50% * 66% = 33% (because of the remaining doors including the one you picked, you have no more information)
          6. p(don't switch|picked right) * p(picked right) = 50% * 33% = 17% (because both of the unpicked doors are wrong, Monty didn’t give you more information)

          So there’s a strong benefit of switching (66% to 33%) if you picked wrong, and even odds of switching if you picked right (17% in both cases).

          Please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong here.