[rrmm]

The fact that the solution of these problems is in some sense satisfying also has a lot to do with the fact that the people making these problems are Western systematic-thinkers. They think like us (because we were trained by them).

That's not to say there isn't value in learning this way of thinking, it's gotten society a long way.

[jxf]

How would you characterize the opposite of (or alternative to) "systematic" thinking?

[rrmm]

Not an alternative to systematization, but different systems. Just that the analogies or groups that make sense to one group may not make sense to others.

[ghodith]

Could you give an example of a different type?

[rrmm]

Broadly, for example, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2838233/

"""

Analytic cognition is characterized by taxonomic and rule-based categorization of objects, a narrow focus in visual attention, dispositional bias in causal attribution, and the use of formal logic in reasoning. In contrast, holistic cognition is characterized by thematic and family-resemblance-based categorization of objects, a focus on contextual information and relationships in visual attention, an emphasis on situational causes in attribution, and dialecticism (Nisbett, Peng, Choi, & Norenzayan, 2001).

"""

This also comes up a lot in cognitive test design.

The anecdote I've always heard in reference to it was

""" What is considered wise in one society may not be considered wise in another; the value and meaning of intelligence depends on cultural norms. Demonstrating the culturally-specific nature of knowledge and intelligence, Cole, Gay, Glick, and Sharp (1971) conducted an experiment in which Western participants and Kpelle participants from Liberia were given an object-sorting task. Participants were asked to sort twenty objects that were divided evenly into the linguistic cat-egories of foods, implements, food containers, and clothing. Westerners tended to sort these objects into the groups for food and implements, while Liberian partici-pants would routinely pair a potato with a knife because, they reasoned, the knife is used to cut the potato. When questioned, Liberian participants justified their pairings by stating that a wise person would group the items in this way. When the researchers asked them to show what an unwise person would do, they did the taxonomic sort that is more familiar to the Western culture. """

quoted from https://uscaseps.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/standardized...

[ghodith]

That actually explains a lot! Thank you, that's a great anecdote

[b3morales]

A simple example that still constrains the puzzle to human abilities (but also makes it less universal) might be this. Rather than diagrams/images, each puzzle consists of two groups of short depictions of two people interacting. The differences are in the relationships, emotional states, or modes of expression. That kind of judgement requires different perception, intuition, knowledge, and so on compared to the puzzles based on shapes. Probably a lot of people who were good with the "standard" Bongard problems would struggle with the "interpersonal" variety, and vice versa.