Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:41:38 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> "Explain how pesticide resistance develops in pest populations. Include the role of genetic variation, selection pressure, and the impact of repeated pesticide use."
The problem is that the answer is in the question and largely determines the answer.
That can be a good thing or it can limit what we learn to what we already know or think we know..
Leading the witness is a no-no in court but that does not keep people from trying. We often see this manoeuvre used deliberately or innocently in interviews and in questionning by media. The questionners often know what thney want to hear and do not want uncontrolled responses.
Framing a question so specifically ensures a likelihood of receiving an expected answer within the bounds of consensus, but can limit chance of a useful surprise.
So, the point is that if we are in charge of an inquiry, as we are here, we tend to get what we ask for -- and that does not only apply to AI.
To get specific answers, we ask limiting questions, but to get a wider perspective, we must ask open-ended questions, then drill down. Unless we want specifics, using general terms widens the search.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|