3 ms·
The article explicitly states that it is not going to present the evidence against the myth; it isn't trying to demonstrate that the myth is false, it's leaving
by Sniffnoy 5y ago
The article explicitly states that it is not going to present the evidence against the myth; it isn't trying to demonstrate that the myth is false, it's leaving that for elsewhere.
- omnicognate 5y agoWhich renders it not worth reading. It's just an ad for a book.
- Sniffnoy 5y agoIt discusses who first suggested the idea; why is that not worth reading? That's certainly not just an ad for a book.
- midasuni 5y agoAnd then he complains that people dismiss his barely evidenced claims.
- tempestn 5y agoThe point is that he did research and didn't find any evidence to support the claim that the staircases were designed this way for defense. We can't know (without reading his book) whether this research was thorough, but the onus really is on the person making the initial claim - that the staircases were designed for defense - to support it. His claim is simply that there's no evidence to support that initial claim.
- mkl 5y agoThat's not really a point in the article's favour. Instead it makes it kind of frustrating and pointless. Anyone can write unsupported assertions about anything. Maybe they're right, maybe they're not.
- Sniffnoy 5y agoIt's not pointless, it's just on a different topic. It's about who first suggested the idea. It's only "frustrating and pointless" if you thought the article was about the the truth or falsity of the idea, rather than who first suggested it; and the opening makes it pretty clear which of the two it's about.
- shakow 5y agoAh yes, Fermat articles, I hate them.
- iso1210 5y agoThus it's a completely pointless article
- Sniffnoy 5y agoNo, because it discusses who first suggested the idea. I'd say that's interesting whether the claim is true or false. It's not pointless just because it's not on the topic you thought it was on.