5 ms·
Developer’s deceptability test
- jiehong 10y agoAlmost didn't finish reading this… However, after reading this, I'm unsure of the real value of this text. It's quite generic, gives you no references to improve your score… TL;DR: the plausibility of things is not always easy to recognise, and we all make mistakes along the way.
- valoox 10y agoMy main concern with this is that reading a piece of opinion is not the same as analysing a proof: emphasis and rhetorical devices are not some obscure trickery which should immediately trigger a reaction, but an integral part of conveying a message. Apparently, this: > So yes, developers and architects also make their decisions with basal ganglia instead of thinking rationally. Usually it is simply a reflection on the previous experience. What is experience if not a sum of formed habits? Should be immediately called as bullshit by someone 'firm with reality'. As a statement of fact, that is correct, as no supporting evidence is brought. But as part of an unfolding reflection, i.e. a way of exposing an idea to the reader before arguing and/or building on it, I find it hard to call it 'plain bullshit' on the spot, even if this is certainly a weak point of any argumentation built on it. To consider the entire piece entirely invalid at the first arguable sentence assumes a linear, deductive construction of the text which is not very representative of how actual arguments are built (and what makes them either strong or weak)