6 ms·
Look at section 19 of the review. Matthew cut off a part of a graph from his sources that doesn't support his theses. How unscientific is that? Why shouldn't I
by kruuuder 4y ago
Look at section 19 of the review. Matthew cut off a part of a graph from his sources that doesn't support his theses. How unscientific is that? Why shouldn't I be disappointed?
> Or get the instruments for a critical approach
What do you mean by that?
- mdp2021 4y ago> What do you mean by that That in a "debate", you could value the proponents and rank the proposals accordingly, but it is a most difficult game for a number of reasons (that the proposals are complex; that the proponents are complex and encompassing strengths and weaknesses; that your judgement over them may be mislead; that circularly it is not clear how to (who will reliably) evaluate them etc.), or that at some point you may want to shift the investment from the pieces of the debate to your ability to assess them critically and build the grounds for a more reliable judgement. Just a general principle of distance from contents - heavyweights are hard to find so our ability to delegate judgement is restricted.