3 ms·

This is actually a huge pet peeve of mine; when people ask for a citation for reasoning, and then smugly declaring victory when no such citation is provided, as

• spacemanmatt 5y ago
  It's a bit more than a pet peeve for me. It's exactly shirking any ability to perform or judge analysis, instead granting total deference to "authorities" that should be cited to provide credibility.
• dataduck 5y ago
  That's especially fair, as there's a good-faith way of engaging with such things that they've avoided: "Could you expand on this please?"
• skybrian 5y ago
  Even expert analysis isn't evidence. At its best, an expert can give you a sense of the range of possibilities, which might include things you never thought of. But actually knowing what's happening in a specific case requires evidence. It seems like being clear about what you're doing (are you just discussing possibilities or trying to claim something specific) would go a long way in avoiding such misunderstandings. (And I of course don't know which cases you're talking about, so I'm just talking about possibilities.)
• jgod 5y ago
  Source?