Zack_M_Davis comments on Unknown knowns: Why did you choose to be monogamous? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (651)
You may be thinking of this passage from G. K. Chesterson's The Thing:
Best wishes, the Less Wrong Reference Desk.
Thank you, Z. M. Davis of the Less Wrong Reference Desk! That's exactly what I was lookin' for. ETA: I might just read the whole Thing; Chesterton's pretty seductive.
I dislike how readers think an argument is more persuasive when it repeats a simple idea over and over again repeatedly many times with hardly any variation or change in content at all despite the simplicity of the idea. Chesterton could've just written "the wall has a purpose, don't be an idiot" and for the attentive reader that'd have been enough.
Superfluous
(Skim the first paragraph and read the second.)
Well for the attentive reader the whole argument itself was probably unnecessary.