Being unable to explain a standpoint is a deal breaker. Even if you’re an expert with good intuition, you should be able to translate that intuition into a cohe

Being unable to explain a standpoint is a deal breaker. Even if you’re an expert with good intuition, you should be able to translate that intuition into a coherent argument. I think we don’t do a good enough job of holding people to this bar. Thus I think there needs to be two criteria here: is the argument plausible, and is backed by evidence or demonstrated expertise. Not just one or the other. Feels obvious once I write it out, to be honest.