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.

Dustin comments on Ontologial Reductionism and Invisible Dragons - Less Wrong Discussion

-11 Post author: Balofsky 20 March 2012 02:29AM

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

Comments (80)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Dustin 20 March 2012 04:05:07AM 11 points [-]

While I'm interested to see the comments that follow, I find that rarely do these type of articles receive much constructive debate because they are too wide-ranging and contain too many points with tons of quotes and all sorts of evidence to support the authors argument.

When you are trying to convince an audience that is not already sympathetic to your argument, you have to make it as easy as possible for them to digest and supply counterpoints. In my instance, I read several things that I thought were probably factually wrong and several lines of argument that I didn't think followed from the evidence provided, but by the time I was through, I forgot what I wanted to respond to and, since I wasn't convinced by the arguments presented, didn't care enough to re-read through the article again to pick out what I wanted to talk about.

While I applaud the effort, I feel you would have a much better response by cutting this down to at least 5, if not more, posts.