"A guitarist who's also an astronaut" sounds more impressive than "An astronaut who plays the guitar", despite both meaning the same thing.
I think it's typically because you lead with the thing people would know them for, or the thing that person is more known for in general. So because there's so few astronauts, it's pretty fucking impressive that you think I'm more likely to know their guitar work than their space career
Do any of you like to go to the ISS in your free time? Just me? I'm never going to find someone who shares my hobbies.
Lots of people play guitar, 'a guitarist' implies a certain level of skill.
Consider that you only swapped 'guitarist', but not 'astronaut'. A guitarist who's been to space isn't near as impressive as a guitarist who's also an astronaut
The first attribute in the list sets the framing.
Another example is:
Jeff is lazy, intelligent and charming.
Marc is charming intelligent and lazy.
Your brain most likely will have a more positive impression of Marc than of Jeff, despite both being described with the exact same attributes.
Or what about this one:
Pay 20 dollars. Then you get to flip a coin. If it lands on heads you gain 100 dollars. If it lands on tails you get nothing.
You get to flip a coin. If it lands on heads you gain 80 dollars. If it lands on tails you have to pay 20 dollars.
People will generally consider the first one to be better, because they could "win" more in the second step and "loose" nothing. The second one will probably be more averted because loosing could be "punished".
If you think slow about it and run the math, both set ups have the same probabilities with the same earnings or losses.
I highly recommend the book "thinking fast, thinking slow" that deals a lot with these biases.
I guess you meant Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. But thank you for the book recommendation. I have added it to my reading list.
That is the correct title. Thank you.
I was so confused about the coin flipping thing until I realized I was skipping "pay 20 dollars" as the start of the first scenario.
leave Brian May alone 😋
It actually doesn't mean the same thing.
Yeah, but also 2 would never be true. Nobody is a primary guitarist and hobbyist astronaut. Astronaut is always someone's primary, and the rest is an afterthought. At least "real" astronauts, not space tourists.
I think that's why the statements feel different.
An astronaut who's also a guitarist. Active. A guitarist who rides in spaceships. Passive.
denotation vs connotation
Not to me.
Katy Perry is ostensibly an "astronaut". Not a pilot, not someone who trained for years to lead science experiments in space, just a guitarist who's also an astronaut.
Astronauts are trained professionals, she was a passenger.
That's what I say
Don't have an opinion on that, or rather I can go bot h ways. Astronaut literally means space traveler. 🤷🏻
Chris Hadfield has entered the chat.
Some people call them Maurice.
I think astronaut has a higher skill floor than guitarist. I don't mentally separate astronauts into categories like amateur/average/talented/expert, it's just assumed that any astronaut is an expert. Leading with describing someone as a guitarist before you mention they're an astronaut too implies that they're also an expert guitarist.
So basically it's the difference between:
Is this a Buckaroo Banzai post? I feel like this is a Buckaroo Banzai post.
It's because being an astronaut is an actual job you commit to or you won't get to do your job. Guitarist can mean anything from picking up the guitar once a month to being lead guitarist in the best band of the world.
One is a job description, the other one can be just a hobby or a full blown job.
If either one says anyways here's wonderwall and launches into the song I'll be ready to shoot them into the sun.
Anyway, here's Wagon Wheel.
That's because astronaut elevates guitarist whereas guitarist doesnt elevate astronaut.