= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
minusdash comments on How to debate when authority is questioned, but really not needed? - 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 (41)
You are right, many people just want to make sure they are not wasting their time, but when they come back with "if you are not an expert then your conclusion is false" I think they are showing that time was not their priority, but just to state the claim was false.
If they came back with "I prefer to talk to an expert" or "how can I believe you?" it would indicate what you say above.
Also, I simplified above with a simple claim as my starting statement. Normally a claim is below an article that already explains the issue and I may affirm that with the addition of my opinion.
For example after this article about the war on science on National Geographic:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/achenbach-text
I may just write a comment:
We have a huge bias towards intuitive conclusions rather than taking the time to understand the facts.
Then someone might write "are you a psychiatrist?". I respond "no" and they follow with a "then you don't know what you are talking about".
Well, you need to decide if it's worth discussing further. Anonymous internet comment sections are often very low quality (tribalism, astroturfing, trolling etc.). If you think they are just trolling you, then ignore them. If you think they want to have a discussion, then you should defend your point or concede that you just stated a layman's opinion.
Comments don't have the space to put your own academic paper there defending what you claim.