MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

A classroom where a wrong theory looks right

2172The deep futureDeadline · Within 120 days, before the new science class is approved

Civilisational assumption

The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.

The question to decide

Suppose a class in which students experience a world where a wrong theory appears correct and then learn its limits. The errors may stick in memory, but what was an assumption may also be confused. Comparing models can make the experience of revising belief shallow, and real inquiry may not meet a refutation within the time available. What experience should teach refutation?

Who decidesFictional Experiential Education Design Meeting

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Have students experience the assumed wrong world

    The attraction of error can be felt directly, but the burden of separating assumption from fact late remains.

  2. Option 2

    Compare multiple models and their limits

    Makes the difference between assumption and fact clear, but the depth of believing and revising on one's own may shrink.

  3. Option 3

    Learn through open-ended real inquiry

    Learns judgment that does not fix the result in advance, but may not meet every key concept within the schedule.

The situation as it stands

The assumed education is designed so that students first spend time in a world where a wrong theory appears to be right, and then its limits are revealed. Decision deadline: within 120 days, before the new science class is approved.

A synthetic future case set in 2172 · One learns about falsification only after having lived inside a wrong theory. The events, figures, technology, and nature of the civilization are assumptions for the sake of the question, not predictions of arrival or observed facts.

  1. Premise 1The assumed education is designed so that students first spend time in a world where a wrong theory appears to be right, and then its limits are revealed.
  2. Premise 2A strong experience can make people remember the error, but students may confuse which stage was an assumption.
  3. Premise 3Real inquiry has unpredictable results, so the intended falsification may not be experienced within the same time.

Where it holdsAn assumed learning world, the experience of failure, falsification

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1Whether students can explain the difference between experience and fact
  2. Unknown 2How much of the wrong belief persists outside class
  3. Unknown 3The standard for learning even when inquiry does not go as expected

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observations, responsible persons, and confirmation channels will establish 「whether students can explain the difference between experience and fact」, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
  • Decide what observations, responsible persons, and confirmation channels will establish 「how much of the wrong belief persists outside class」, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
  • Decide what observations, responsible persons, and confirmation channels will establish 「the standard for learning even when inquiry does not go as expected」, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

Some students chose the wrong model even after the explanation because of the strong impression the experience left.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

An unexpected result of inquiry produced a new question that is not in the materials.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Socratic dialogue

How is getting a quick answer different from becoming able to ask questions?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-EDUCATION-33 · version 1.5.0
Content identity, SHA-256
ef6876f4fe84eecfa51dd97d03191fe7cb0cab38511a6634b6610944d71664a3
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com