Yeah it's a little unnecessarily complicated with the many worlds bit. The main idea is a clever arguer can start with any conclusion and then retroactively se

Yeah it's a little unnecessarily complicated with the many worlds bit. The main idea is a clever arguer can start with any conclusion and then retroactively select the points that support their conclusion while ignoring any evidence or points that contradict it. If you do this then the points you bring up don't inform much because you've already decided the conclusion based on something else (in the example it's whoever paid the most for their arguments). It's better to start with trying to understand things and then using what you learn to inform a conclusion.