= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on Privileging the Question - 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 (311)
That sounds like a nearly fully general counterargument -- I could be asking the same question about watching a movie, playing darts, studying geology, or whatever else the hell the person I'm speaking to is doing (short of working on efficient charity and the like).
It's not a counterargument. It's a request for an explanation.
This interpretation requires directly contradicting the explicit and intentional claim in the grandparent.
(It is not always inappropriate to call 'bullshit' on a claim that a question is not a rhetorical question when it actually is but it seems more appropriate to do so directly rather than just casually ignoring the claim and assuming it is an argument anyway. As such I assume hasty reading is involved.)
A question can have presuppositions even if it's not rhetorical. If I ask you whether you have stopped beating your wife, I'm implicitly claiming you have a wife and were beating her at some point, even if I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not you're still doing so.
QY is implicitly saying that brainoil must think voting is valuable relative to the other things ey could be doing, with which I either agree or ADBOC depending on what exactly is meant by "valuable".