3 ms·
Maybe the rejection letters provided more details as to why they thought his argument was invalid which isn't captured in the article. If they did not, it seem
by sjg007 8y ago
Maybe the rejection letters provided more details as to why they thought his argument was invalid which isn't captured in the article. If they did not, it seems to me that the reviewers didn't offer specific criticisms which would have been more useful.
I find these questions and paradoxes that illuminate the limits of logical reasoning quite fascinating.
- mannykannot 8y agoIt is hard to provide specific criticisms of a work one does not understand, and which makes no testable claims. If it is just one reviewer, then he may be missing the point, but if it is everyone, you have to give some thought to the possibility that it is you who is mistaken. In principle, someone could be both right and incomprehensible, but there's no way forward unless one can get some people to both understand and agree with you. Even then, you could end up with one faction thinking it is on to something profound, while another thinks they are mistaken, as is happening with Integrated Information Theory at the moment.