4 ms·

I think if you're pushing back on the GP to ask for evidence, it is intellectually dishonest to go ahead and make your own un-founded statements. Can _you_ link

I think if you're pushing back on the GP to ask for evidence, it is intellectually dishonest to go ahead and make your own un-founded statements. Can _you_ link to some of these stories to reinforce your point?

yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
Yeah, fine. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leah_Remini#Scientology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leah_Remini#Scientology - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-be-opposed-to-vaccines-this-is-how-i-changed-my-mind/2019/02/11/20fca654-2e24-11e9-86ab-5d02109aeb01_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-be-opposed... - https://www.self.com/story/from-anti-to-pro-vaccine https://www.self.com/story/from-anti-to-pro-vaccine As far as challenges of the put your money where your mouth is kind, this one was pretty easy. So easy in fact, that you should take a moment to reflect on why you were so quick to get on a moral high-horse of burden of proof.
- Spare_account 7y ago
  It was a reasonable request. You appear to be upset about being asked for supporting links, despite having made the same request yourself. I genuinely don't understand that. I'm concerned that we're drifting too far away from the orignal topic though, so there may be limited scope to explore this aspect of things here.
  - yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
    No, it was not reasonable. Not only did you call me "intellectually dishonest", but you also fell prey to the Burden of Proof logical fallacy, even after I had previously hinted at that by asking to see proof for the original claim. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    >It was a reasonable request. Was it though? Let's break down what happened. A: Claim X. B: Can you support X? Claim not X. C: Can you support not X. You should provide support for not X before asking for support of X. Is it really reasonable to call out B for not providing support and not call out A for the same? B was the first to ask for sources, but A made the claim without sources. It also seems like if B only made the claim not X and didn't ask for sources, they would have been less likely to be called out themself. So is asking people who ask for sources to provide sources really reasonable when we don't make the same request of people who are making claims without any sources? It seems to give a first move advantage and thus wouldn't be reasonable.
    - Spare_account 7y ago
      Sorry, I've only just seen this. Your breakdown doesn't reflect what happened here. You would be correct if all B had said was "Support X". What we saw above was: A: Claim X B: Support X, I've observed Y. C: Support Y too, please. In this particular case, Y was arguably the inverse of X but it was nevertheless described as having been observed many times, but without any sources.
- ClumsyPilot 7y ago
  You just provided anecdotes, so stop attacking the other person and consider that he is right. You would have to prove effectiveness. i.e. out of 100 anti-vaxers, 90% stopped believing in bullshit. If it works on 1 person out of a million, that's pretty useless. But it is well known fact that piling on more information does not change entrenched belief, it has been subject of peer-reviewed research for decades. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont...
  - yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
    I was the first to point out that all I have are anecdotes. I did so under the perspective that I am sceptical of their claim. I do not have to prove anything. As I have already said, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim, i.e., not me. Even as a child in primary school, I learned in science class that theories are rarely proven, because it is so easy to disprove a supposedly proven theory by providing counter-evidence. This is all somewhat tautological anyway. If you don't believe that people ever change their mind when presented with better information, then why are you even bothering to comment? Isn't it futile?
    - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
      > why are you even bothering to comment? Isn't it futile? Haha, quite possibly. I mean, even with the best will in the world, can you file commenting on HN under 'useful activity'?

yakshaving_jgt 7y ago

Yeah, fine. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leah_Remini#Scientology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leah_Remini#Scientology - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-be-opposed-to-vaccines-this-is-how-i-changed-my-mind/2019/02/11/20fca654-2e24-11e9-86ab-5d02109aeb01_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-be-opposed... - https://www.self.com/story/from-anti-to-pro-vaccine https://www.self.com/story/from-anti-to-pro-vaccine As far as challenges of the put your money where your mouth is kind, this one was pretty easy. So easy in fact, that you should take a moment to reflect on why you were so quick to get on a moral high-horse of burden of proof.

Spare_account 7y ago
It was a reasonable request. You appear to be upset about being asked for supporting links, despite having made the same request yourself. I genuinely don't understand that. I'm concerned that we're drifting too far away from the orignal topic though, so there may be limited scope to explore this aspect of things here.
- yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
  No, it was not reasonable. Not only did you call me "intellectually dishonest", but you also fell prey to the Burden of Proof logical fallacy, even after I had previously hinted at that by asking to see proof for the original claim. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  >It was a reasonable request. Was it though? Let's break down what happened. A: Claim X. B: Can you support X? Claim not X. C: Can you support not X. You should provide support for not X before asking for support of X. Is it really reasonable to call out B for not providing support and not call out A for the same? B was the first to ask for sources, but A made the claim without sources. It also seems like if B only made the claim not X and didn't ask for sources, they would have been less likely to be called out themself. So is asking people who ask for sources to provide sources really reasonable when we don't make the same request of people who are making claims without any sources? It seems to give a first move advantage and thus wouldn't be reasonable.
  - Spare_account 7y ago
    Sorry, I've only just seen this. Your breakdown doesn't reflect what happened here. You would be correct if all B had said was "Support X". What we saw above was: A: Claim X B: Support X, I've observed Y. C: Support Y too, please. In this particular case, Y was arguably the inverse of X but it was nevertheless described as having been observed many times, but without any sources.
ClumsyPilot 7y ago
You just provided anecdotes, so stop attacking the other person and consider that he is right. You would have to prove effectiveness. i.e. out of 100 anti-vaxers, 90% stopped believing in bullshit. If it works on 1 person out of a million, that's pretty useless. But it is well known fact that piling on more information does not change entrenched belief, it has been subject of peer-reviewed research for decades. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont...
- yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
  I was the first to point out that all I have are anecdotes. I did so under the perspective that I am sceptical of their claim. I do not have to prove anything. As I have already said, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim, i.e., not me. Even as a child in primary school, I learned in science class that theories are rarely proven, because it is so easy to disprove a supposedly proven theory by providing counter-evidence. This is all somewhat tautological anyway. If you don't believe that people ever change their mind when presented with better information, then why are you even bothering to comment? Isn't it futile?
  - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
    > why are you even bothering to comment? Isn't it futile? Haha, quite possibly. I mean, even with the best will in the world, can you file commenting on HN under 'useful activity'?