4 ms·

Meta-comment: I really dislike judging a person's argument based on correct predictions said person made before. It's turning the "argumentum ad hominem" insid

• oelmekki 9y ago
  In philosophy, it's called an "aristoteles dixit" (Aristotle said), based on the fact that it was often considered proof enough in middle age if an argument was defended by Aristotle. As a meta-meta-comment, this is one of the things I like the most about HN : we don't see any avatar and nicknames are not obvious, so we consider arguments before considering who made them.
• shanusmagnus 9y ago
  Meta-reply: '[C]orrect predictions [someone] made before' = data. Instead of discounting it, I would rather count it more heavily, esp. in a complex domain where a full principled evaluation of the evidence is beyond most people. There's a reason you can't read a review paper and then get a PhD in whatever topic. Having to establish everything in a logical chain from first principles every time you want to opine is inefficient, to say the least. Previous performance matters. It's not all that matters, but nobody is claiming that.
• prostoalex 9y ago
  Yep, the Meredith Whitney effect. She made a correct call on large financial institutions facing trouble in 2007-2008, and then predicted a large number of municipal bond defaults. That second prediction is still waiting for the reality to catch up.