= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on [Link] Salon piece analyzing Donald Trump's appeal using rationality - 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 (65)
Do you think Salon would publish a piece about how to check on what you read?
Do you already have something written on the subject? I'd like to read it.
No. It would probably be worth doing but difficult, since evaluating truth or at least plausibility depends on a complex web of assumptions.
Yes if you could fit it into some kind of social justice narrative such as how to decode if the author is a secret racist.
While James' answer was somewhat cynical, I suspect he's not far from the mark. If it fits into a liberal narrative, and pushes the right emotional buttons, they might publish it.