3 ms·
Indeed that could be evidence depending on the strength of the beliefs underlying the disagreement. Imagine the parent commenter simply sought out expert consen
by adamisom 5y ago
Indeed that could be evidence depending on the strength of the beliefs underlying the disagreement. Imagine the parent commenter simply sought out expert consensus and that the consensus was unmistakable; surely you’d agree that if some practice “disagreed”, there’s a higher than average chance something unusual is going on, like monopoly; that’s “evidence”.
- fastball 5y agoOnly if the "experts" had strong objective evidence for their consensus in the first place, which is usually not the case. If you have objective evidence you don't need experts.
- roenxi 5y agoIt isn't really evidence of much. One of the most reliable consensus points of experts is "you need to hire lots of people in my field of speciality and they should be treated really well and their work should be regarded as important!". Not an iron-clad law, but a reliable trend. I'll single out "dropping their QA department" as an example of exactly the sort of situation where expert consensus would quite possibly sit in opposition to a good business outcome. If someone wants to argue there is a monopoly, the evidence should be of a "competition is illegal or physically impossible" nature. Not disagreeing with business practices. Business practices are important but not the be all and end all of success.