4 ms·
Author here, thanks for the feedback. This article is indeed edited down heavily. I had more conversational drafts. Your remark is something I have been thinki
by larve 4y ago
Author here, thanks for the feedback. This article is indeed edited down heavily. I had more conversational drafts.
Your remark is something I have been thinking about. For me, it’s patently evident that I’m wrong about 90% of the time when discussing facts. In fact, “truth” is one of my core values, and the only way I can honor that (and be a good engineer) is to question my every statement. That’s why I write unit tests, run experiments, read so many books, etc…
When I know something is true, I tend to only state it once, because why would I need to repeat it. I am starting to realize this doesn’t work out that well :)
These articles are in themselves a series of experiments to see how I can convey these thoughts.
- antasvara 4y ago>When I know something is true, I tend to only state it once, because why would I need to repeat it. I am starting to realize this doesn’t work out that well :) The point I'm making is that you didn't state this once. You kind of stated it in the first paragraph, but not in a way that implies that you can be wrong for reasons that aren't miscommunications. >For me, it’s patently evident that I’m wrong about 90% of the time when discussing facts. I think that's the part that wasn't clear from the article. When you title an article "Autistic people can't acknowledge when they're wrong," then spend an article talking about how this is due to misunderstandings, it comes across like the exact rationalizations that your article strikes back against.