My new favorite question to ask over lunch

“So, are you a regional thinker?”

If they say no, fail them.  If they say yes, ask them to explain.  Here is my old favorite question to ask, and therein you find links to the very first question of this kind.

Comments

So, for those of us who don't think like you, could you explain the question?

Yes. If I were asked that question out of the blue I'd wonder just what it meant. "Region? What's that?" My top suspicion is that it's geographical region. Even if so, think about what regionally?

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Seriously.

Comments for this post are closed

Yeah, what the hell does it mean? And would it mean the same thing outside the USA/DC/GMU?

Comments for this post are closed

Sounds like an annoying lunch

+1

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Yeah, my first response would be 'wth does regional mean?' Hopefully that doesn't mean I fail...

Comments for this post are closed

Yeah, it's a bullshit question, like the ones Google used to ask ... What should matter is one's reasoning or explanation of one's answer, whatever one's answer is

Why not ask, are you a global or local or celestial thinker?

Because he's looking for you to respond, "I not only think regionally, but also individually, locally, nationally, globally, and when appropriate intergalactically, though so far I haven't yet done business with ET."

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

You don't do lunch with women much,. do you?

Have you seen where he eats?

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

If I'm not in Tyler's inner circle and I say "I don't understand the question," then I guess the answer is yes.

Comments for this post are closed

Very zen

Comments for this post are closed

"It is clear to me therefore by every kind of proof that Cambyses was mad exceedingly; for otherwise he would not have attempted to deride religious rites and customary observances. For if one should propose to all men a choice, bidding them select the best customs from all the customs that there are, each race of men, after examining them all, would select those of his own people; thus all think that their own customs are by far the best: and so it is not likely that any but a madman would make a jest of such things."

http://www.bostonleadershipbuilders.com/herodotus/book03.htm

I say one could be ethnocentric and empathetic simultaneously. Model that.

My comment was not intended to respond to Jeff in particular.

Comments for this post are closed

Haven't the numerous and various versions of cosmopolitanism already modeled this repeatedly and never with universal success?

I hear ya, but I was aiming for something more narrow.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

What larks one has in the DC burbs looking down one's nose at those whose sentiments are provincial!

It is the self-aware regional thinkers who are praised, and the faux cosmopolitans who are called to account. It does depend somewhat on the region, however!

But regional thinkers are by definition not self-aware that they are regional thinkers. If they claim to be self-aware regional thinkers, they are faux regional thinkers.

Precisely. Have you ever met a small minded provincial who doesn't deny that he (or she) is a small minded provincial?

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

-1

That's -1 to Tyler. No one wastes their time figuring out whether they are a regional thinker. But I like the label "faux cosmopolitan." I'm going to self apply that from now on.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Ugh, your previous question was interesting but this one isn't because.
1) It isn't consistent or obvious what regional thinker means.
2) It's a yes/no question, there's not too much opportunity for idiosyncratic/interesting answers.
3) It has an 'obvious' right answer from the 'fail them'.
4) Assuming that anyone knew what you were talking about, there's still the big problem of a total lack of any sort of scale. A regional thinker compared to what? Other people? Some sort of platonic ideal of thought?

I enjoy this post as an example of classic 'bad' marginal revolution. I actually get a kick out of Tyler's opaque, pleased with itself, one man cant.

Comments for this post are closed

Tyler, please give an example of a regional thinker and a non-regional thinker.

Plato, and then Plato again (if I am taking Tyler and Herodotus the right way).

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Yes -- to a limit.

Regionalism recognizes that political boundaries are artificial. Economic, ecological, and social regions are more important. These regions even straddle national borders.

Political boundaries, from local to national, stymie regionalism.

Comments for this post are closed

Alex has been asking this question for some time

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2007/12/where-do-our-be.html

Comments for this post are closed

The only reasonable answer to this question is "mu" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(negative)). Am I a cosmopolitan? No, probably not. Am I a regional or local thinker though? No, unless we use a loose definition of region that encompasses academia, the economics profession, and blogs like MU or LessWrong. Those groups (including their possible faux cosmopolitan side) are more indicative of my culture than any particular geographical region.

A question that maybe gets to Tyler's point while being less of a trap is "What tribes do you belong to?".

Comments for this post are closed

The problem with this kind of question is that it punishes people who are knowledgable and open minded, but who don't know what this esoteric question is actually asking, and rewards superficial thinkers who do well on playing to the question asker's prejudices by reciting what they've been taught by Kaplan or other college essay tutorial companies. Those people know how to play the game, but of course knowing how to game their answers is not the same as actually being culturally aware and open minded; usually it reflects the opposite. These kind of bad questions plague the college admissions process so I'm not surprised Tyler in academia thinks this is a much better question than most of the people leaving comments.

What Tyler seems to be asking is whether the person only narrowly considers his own cultural perspective, or is the person aware of other cultural perspectives and if that has changed his own views at any point? Of course, asking it that way leads to a certain kind of answer, so the interviewer needs to be a much better interviewer by asking multiple, open ended questions until he brings out what he's really after.

Maybe the thing we've learned is that Tyler is actually not a good interviewer? Not everyone can be Brian Lamb.

So open minded that you would feel punished by a question that you disagree with. I think I side with Mr Cowan here.

I am not saying I would be punished. I am saying that there are certain kind of questions that cater to people who are trained to answer these kind of questions instead of actually telling the interviewer what he really wants to know. In this case, Tyler's question of "Are you a regional thinker?" has made many people perplexed. "What is Tyler asking?" seems to be a common response. I will take the risk that the majority of Tyler's commenters are not stupid, and that this indicates the question is not very clear.

However, by looking at the links to Herodotus, Tyler indicates what he is really interested is whether the person is constrained in his thinking in some way, or whether has has looked to thinkers and experiences outside his milieu that has expanded his horizons. (Now maybe I am wrong in this assessment, but if so it means Tyler's question is even more confusing.) If that is the case, then people who do fit that category, but are simply unclear about what the question means could not be adequately assessed. This, to me, does seem like they would be "punished" because they would be ideal candidates, but because Tyler's wording is so bad he would end up eliminating them.

Tyler has made it very clear that a "Yes" answer means a follow up question, but a "No" question is an automatic fail. Why? If instead of failing the "no" people, if he would ask the right follow up questions, he could learn someone who answered "no" could be the every kind of candidate he wants.

On the other hand, I think many similar style questions (often thought of by the interviewer as being particularly clever or revealing) don't really illuminate the candidate all that well. Instead, those kinds of questions reward people who have taken the time and money to hire Kaplan style tutors who can coach them in the best way to answer such questions. These kinds of coachings do nothing to make the interviewee a better person except that because they've learned certain tricks and skills, they do better in interviews. So even if the person is not a "regional thinker", he can con Tyler that he is one. In essence, Tyler is not asking the question that tells him how good the candidate is. He is asking questions that tells him how good the candidate is at answering this style of questions - which are very predominate in academia.

I mentioned Brian Lamb for a reason. His style of interviewing authors is the exact opposite of the "clever question" school. He asks very simple questions, but he asks very incisive ones that cause his guests to explain their reasoning and can become quite illuminating as Lamb's follow up questions, also simple, probe deeper and deeper. As someone who has watched Booknotes and other programs that Lamb has been on, it's very clear that Lamb is not ignorant about his guests or subject material. So when he asks questions like "Who is Abraham Lincoln" it's not because he doesn't know who Lincoln is. He wants the interviewer to tell the audience who Lincoln is (on the off chance they don't know), but also importantly learn who that person thinks Lincoln is, which could be revealing.

As someone who has done job interviews to hire people, I find that the Brian Lamb interview style produces better results than the "clever question that will be truly illuminating" style.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

"Stop touching my leg under the table, professor."

Comments for this post are closed

"What does that even mean?"

Comments for this post are closed

You are half right. If they say no, "fail them", by all means. But if they say yes, you should fail them similarly.
Only "what on earth are you talking about?" and variants are worthy of any respect at all.

This seems like a really good question for a Turing test.
Either "no" or "yes" are likely good "it-is-probably-a-cheap-robot" indicators.

Comments for this post are closed

Do you like to signal status by using superficially clever jargon? If yes! you might be a good economist.

Close. Replace "good economist" with "bad economist" and you have it right.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

I think with a region of my brain,

If that is what you mean by a regional thinker,

So says my prefrontal cortex.

Comments for this post are closed

African or European?

Comments for this post are closed

Oh I get it, its very clever. How's that working for you.

Comments for this post are closed

Are we playing the guess the meaning behind the autist's words, game?

Comments for this post are closed

Absolutely.

Explain?

I do think (hope?) I am some sort of thinker. Therefore the only question is the modifier thereof. I think self-styled "global thinkers" are usually associated with pseudophilosophy in which I'm not interested. So I'm not a "global thinker". Hence it stands to reason that I must be a "regional" thinker of some sort, that is to the extent "regional" is the opposite of "global".

Reihan Salam on Twitter seemed surprised to hear that I don't consider myself a cosmopolitan, at all. I guess it's because I'm a liberal, too.

Comments for this post are closed

I understood the question and its relevance right away. I literally work for a "regional development agency" so I see regional thinking daily. I once wrote a report explaining that droves of workers from my region were migrating to another region after wages in this latter region had climbed 40% higher. My director read it and said "oh that's seriously bad news," which blew my mind. Our mandate is to raise our local regions real incomes, and yet it wasn't obvious to him that moving to get a 40% pay raise was doing just that. This is one area that GNP improves upon GDP.

Comments for this post are closed

I think Tyler is trying to create a new buzzword for the crackpot right.

Yeah, that is EXACTLY what he does.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

Yep, I always think with my nether regions!

Comments for this post are closed

Mu!

Comments for this post are closed

Does anyone come back for a second lunch?

+1

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

I like this blog, and Tyler is generous with his time, so I'm trying to be forgiving and hoping he will admit what the various posters have pointed out - this is one of the most pretentious posts I've read anywhere in a long time. I guess he deserves a pass - if you're putting out so much good stuff, occasionally you will (for lack of a better word) fail.

Comments for this post are closed

At the least, isn't this question a false dichotomy? Or on the regional-to-cosmopolitan (or whatever) axis, is "0" [regional] the only correct answer for Tyler? That would seem...weird and unpragmatic.

Comments for this post are closed

Not many of you are passing the lunch test!

I don't think anyone wants to.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed

C'mon guys, you're supposed to be reading this post in a Straussian manner! If you're not reading between the lines that the author subtly hinted at writing, you're doing it wrong.

Comments for this post are closed

Pigs get fat. Hogs get slaughtered. Exposure to these rays has been scientifically linked with age related macular degeneration and cataracts, two serious eye health issues that can cost you your vision. And not only are sunglasses a great way to protect the health of your eyes, but they are also an essential part of most women's wardrobes. From Vogue, to Givenchy, to Miu Miu prescription sunglasses, famous designers around the world have incorporated sunglasses into their designer lines of clothing and accessories.

Comments for this post are closed

I am a regional thinker. My region is the North Atlantic seaboard -- Boston, New York, and D.C. But there is nothing in between those cities, really. I am an *urban* North Atlantic thinker.

For example...

1) I think that Boston sports actually matter. Boston-New York games matter about as much as a presidential election.

2) I think public radio is cool. I think that if you didn't listen to the latest episode of This American Life and talk about it at lunch all week, then you must not be paying attention.

3) I think that non-college educated, native-born Bostonians of Irish descent, are basically aborigines.

4) I think that a polite, unassuming, formally educated, and garden-variety liberal Democratic outlook, coupled with a genuine yet pragmatic love of liberty (without becoming ideologically libertarian), is a pretty good place to be politically. 75th percentile, at worst.

5) If a college professor wrote something down, anything at all, I think I should read it. I don't care if it's a podcast, a blog post, a magazine article or a graph on a napkin -- SHOW ME IT.

6) I think if I donate to like 5 charities, but only like $5 each, I can tell my friends I support Cause X and I'm not lying, because hey, that's what Kant would do. And they will agree that I am cool for supporting so many good causes.

7) I think a good friendship consists of two college graduates and three advanced degrees, none of which have anything to do with one another (the degrees, that is), and that these two people a) enjoy pontificating about things they thought they learned while in college but possibly learned from the blogosphere and b) enjoy listening to one other one pontificate about that stuff.

8) I think that law and policy made in Washington, D.C. probably matters more to the human race than almost anything I can do as a private citizen. (Note that that is not necessarily an endorsement of what comes out of Washington D.C.) So that's where I should focus all my energies as a thinking person -- it's not like I'm going to change the world with my (gasp) *job.*

9) I think the New York Giants, New York Knicks, New York Rangers, and New York Yankees are the four best sports teams of all history. No, make that all of the past, present, and future. Even the Knicks are (totally) gonna win a championship this year.

10) I think it's OK, or even laudable, to stop thinking any of the above, and to speak with friends about how I came to change my mind. Changing my mind is fun more often than it is uncomfortable.

...and so on.

Comments for this post are closed

Comments for this post are closed