I'm still not sure where you're getting your impression. I will not just look for corroborating information, and I don't think I said anything that sounded like that, but the voting indicates that people agree with you, and I don't understand at all.

1) Total votes don't work that way. (That is an example of me being derisive, but not toward you. Also, contrary to my own policy, I did not downvote your previous comment, if only because I don't want to inflame you further.)

2) As far as I can tell, intending to avoid falling into a bias or committing a fallacy doesn't always cause the bias to go away. This is one of the main points of Kahneman's research -- some biases are so pernicious that even people who know about them fall flat into them. That's why I recommended doing a systematic literature review. If you know that you've sampled a sufficiently large fragment of the underlying literature, then you'll know that if dissenting literature exists, you made every attempt to find it.

(Or maybe my downvotes are just because I have again failed to come up with a civil-sounding way to express discomfort with an interlocutor's tone? Is there any way to do that at all, or are my choices radio silence v. painstakingly refraining from reacting to the tone for an entire conversation? Someone please tell me.)

If you don't want to respond to me because of tonal issues, I won't take it personally. In the future I will attempt to be as toneless as possible when responding to you.

I'm interested in contradictions and elaborations, especially where it seems like the differences derive from people having variety that I didn't account for the first time around. I'll give up if it's too hard (I'm not getting paid, this isn't my life's work, etc.) but I'm not going to give up if the Second Edition has to be very different in content from the first (why in the world would I want to bother writing a Second Edition that had no material differences from its predecessor?)

This is genuinely new information. Compare this with

This could result in me eventually giving up, or in a Luminosity Sequence: Second Edition (Now With Literature, Part Of This Complete Breakfast!), or (optimism!) me being able to sort ~90% of people into some number of categories such that their category membership tells me how to help them develop luminosity superpowers in N simple steps with exercises/therapy-ish stuff/etc.

which does not seem to imply anything about largely modifying or revising the basic theory of luminosity.