= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam comments on Rationality Quotes Thread December 2015 - 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 (75)
Probably true. But I don't think that's the sort of thing Jim is talking about in the post redlizard was quoting from; do you?
Oh. I haven't followed the link before commenting.
Now I did... and I don't really see the connection between the article and consensus. The most prominent example is how managers misunderstood the technical issues with Challenger: but that's about putting technically unsavvy managers into positions of power over engineers, not about consensus.
(I wonder if this is an example of a pattern: "Make a statement. Write an article mostly about something else, using arguments that a reader will probably agree with. At the end, a careless reader is convinced about the statement.")
Technically unsavy manages who insisted that the engineers tell them what they wanted to hear, i.e., who insisted that they be included in the consensus and then refused to shift their position.
I think that level of logical rigour is par for the course for this particular author.