4 ms·
Can you find anyone who reads that headline and thinks overwork popped out behind them with a gun and shot them, or anything remotely like it? > "It's just obv
by jodrellblank 5y ago
Can you find anyone who reads that headline and thinks overwork popped out behind them with a gun and shot them, or anything remotely like it?
> "It's just obviously a nonsense claim"
Yes, obviously, and even more obviously after reading the article and the linked WHO press release which says "The study concludes that working 55 or more hours per week is associated with an estimated 35% higher risk of a stroke".
Attacking straw people based on a title of a newpaper headline isn't pro-science.
- anm89 5y agoI am clearly not proposing that they are claiming an abstract concept held a physical weapon to kill anyone. Actually that's the point though. You would have to believe something nonsensical like this for it to be possible for the headline to be true as it is written. The headline is "Overwork Killed x" and that implies in no uncertain terms that overwork directly and solely killed people which is again, obviously nonsense.
- d0gbread 5y agoThe attribution effect is implied, is the point the parent was making, and while it's good to be aware of your point, I personally feel like the title is the least important part to critique given the obvious implication. If your point carries into the analysis or synthesis, that is a problem.