= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
AdeleneDawner comments on Conversation Halters - 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 (94)
Meta: Why was this voted down? (I voted it up earlier, and it's at 0 karma at the moment.)
I understand that the actual point in the comment is tangential to the original article, and thus could be taken as off-topic or wrong, but I find it valuable to read such comments and the reactions that they evoke; such exchanges help point out the limitations of the tools and frameworks being discussed.
I voted it up as an interesting tangent and a credible point. While lunchbox is talking about a different usage of the appeals it does demonstrate that there is a blurry line there between 'conversation halter' and 'actual argument that isn't necessarily designed to end the debate except in as much as they think they other person should see their error and concur'. Intent, context and tone make huge differences here.