= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
bramflakes comments on What Can We Learn About Human Psychology from Christian Apologetics? - 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 (162)
I don't get this part. Why have they succeeded and how have other atheists failed? There's a few other typos and grammatical slips that other commenters have pointed out too.
Great essay though. It also seems to be true for ideologies in general, not just religion. I'd bet most political essays that purport to be towards the open-minded skeptic are actually used to provide more intellectual ammunition for the already-converted. However, I also suspect that there is more genuine "apologetic" material for political ideologies.
If this was confusing, I mean succeeded at holding on to their faith through apologetics. If you understood that and are wondering why they're different... I don't know.
If you can point me towards other typos & grammatical slips that would be helpful. I generally try to proofread my work but I'm a terrible proofreader.
A proofreading trick I use sometimes: Touch each individual word as you read it (with a physical pointer like a pen or with the mouse pointer). For even greater accuracy, read aloud while you're doing this.
A proofreading trick I have not used much: Make a printout and read it upside down.
Edit:
Proofreading with a bigger font makes it easier to catch stuff like "assume" versus "assure". A serif font makes the difference between "I" and "l" visible. In a fixed-width font (e.g. Courier New) all the characters are the same width, so spelling and punctuation errors are easier to see (compare "rn"/"m" versus "
rn"/"m").