4 ms·
I've found that a pretty good rule of thumb for recognizing people who don't care to actually validate facts is any time they use "rules of thumb" or something
by mdwrigh2 16y ago
I've found that a pretty good rule of thumb for recognizing people who don't care to actually validate facts is any time they use "rules of thumb" or something similar.
For example, look at the parent of this post, and you'll find a 'Rule of Thumb' touting a couple anecdotes about when the rule of thumb worked in some instance, without any proof.
I also find the phrase to be highly condescending to those of us who care to study an argument for what it contains, and not just a phrase it happens to use.
- cal5k 16y agoNowhere did I say that I hadn't read what was written. However, the format was cause for suspicion. As I mention above, my objection is that it paints an overly simplistic picture of the "myth" by reducing it to a one-line straw man which can then easily be dismantled in the "fact" section. So while it's true that it is important to evaluate the content presented, it is also critical to consider the content not included either by commission or omission.