3 ms·
But that's precisely my point. I'm not saying that you or the OP is actually arguing the extreme of the position, I'm saying that the argument that "cutting the
by ralusek 7y ago
But that's precisely my point. I'm not saying that you or the OP is actually arguing the extreme of the position, I'm saying that the argument that "cutting the budget is needless" because "lives are on the line" implies the extreme unless you are willing to accept that there is a correct amount of diminishing returns where we would agree that cuts to the budget were not needless, but justifiable, regardless of lives being on the line. So if we accept that we both agree that there is a figure where this tradeoff takes place, then what I'd like to know is why the previous figure was correct, and the figure post-cuts is not.
- sfj 7y agoScott Adams calls what you're talking about “a half-pinion”, ie. when someone only looks at one side of an argument to form their opinion.
- ralusek 7y agoI'm not sure what side of the argument I'm ignoring, do you mind clarifying? I feel as though my argument is precisely predicated on adding additional considerations into the mix, rather than ignoring some component of the original point.
- sfj 7y agoI was actually agreeing with you. I was trying to say the other poster had a “half-pinion”. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
- ralusek 7y agoAh, I see. Ya, I often reach for metaphors like this: https://storage.needpix.com/rsynced_images/perspective-3785866_1280.jpg https://storage.needpix.com/rsynced_images/perspective-37858... Basically, staring at one of the shadows on the wall and declaring confidently that you know what the shape of the solid is that produced it.