= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on Lore Sjöberg's Life-Hacking FAQK - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (13)
I disagree. It had a premise and an implied conclusion - it was clearly an argument.
If you meant that it's not a good argument, you did not provide a very good argument for why that would be the case. I could just as well argue that you should not eat bananas, since bananas sometimes contain poison and explosives.
How often does top-level planning get things horribly wrong, and how do the alternatives fare?
Hm, I wrote that under an assumption that everyone already knew the fact stated in the comment, since it was repeated a number of times before, so the comment could only be an appeal to availability of whatever weight the bare fact of there being a post like that has.
Incidentally, formalism has a way of losing track of the original intent, which is at odds with the intent of signaling ability to handle rigor.