Re: Certifications don't count! (from one who has none)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:55:23 -0400
Debating about heuristics is like disputing about tastes: de gustibus non est disputandum! A heuristic is not a hypothesis. In our lives, we use many heuristics to learn, to take a certain course of action. Otherwise, it leads to empty slogans like "no one should not make a decision without having complete knowledge in the said of domain of discourse. Even though it is trivially true that all heuristics are fallible, why people use them? This and allied questions have been investigated in the history and philosophy of sciences, cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence (human/machine learning).
In this particular thread, the heuristic is: do or don't prefer those who have certifications. There are another set of heuristics, which I call as Burlesonian heuristics: prefer only those who graduated from Ivy Schools or Military schools, prefer those who have excellent SAT/LSAT score, make a decision on what brand of cloths one wear, and so on.
I have no problems with people using any whatsoever heuristics. Even those who passed all these interviews and are offered employed have failed in the work; does it mean that we should abolish the interviewing process at all?Received on Mon Jun 09 2008 - 09:55:23 CDT