You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

ArisKatsaris comments on How to Draw Conclusions Like Sherlock Holmes - Less Wrong Discussion

-5 Post author: abcd_z 27 December 2011 01:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (27)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 27 December 2011 10:27:42PM *  6 points [-]

It is easy to judge Socrates now, how ignorant was he about Zeus.

Downvoted for making an unsubstantiated claim that Socrates believed in Zeus. This is sheer clumsiness. You make assumptions about what every ancient Greek must have believed because you underestimate them -- though some of them were indeed rational enough to not believe in Zeus. And then you use that false assumption about false failings to support the argument that we must excuse away Arthur Conan Doyle's real failings.

Also, it's you who argued that A.C. Doyle "was one of the great rationalists of the 19th century" -- that's a rather strong claim that argues he exhibited significantly better reasoning than most of his contemporaries.

If he was taken in by spiritualism, when Houdini wasn't, and he was taken in by crude child-produced fakes of fairies, when many of his contemporaries weren't -- what's even slight evidence that he can be called a rationalist, let alone a great one?