4 ms·

Let me point you to the Pyramid of Refutation. http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg Most arguments that I read that argue against Gruber

by pkaler 15y ago

Let me point you to the Pyramid of Refutation. http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg Most arguments that I read that argue against Gruber and MG's point of view resort to either ad hominem or respond to tone. Calling Gruber and MG Apple evangelists does not refute their central point. I like Joshua Topolsky and The Verge a lot. I think they produce the best reviews in the business. Their audio and video casts are funny and informative. JT is probably the most informed Android reviewer. He's probably the most informed gadget reviewer. JT: "It doesn't get under my skin because I fundamentally disagree that Android 4.0 lacks the polish of iOS." JT: "I don't disagree with Gruber and MG. The iPhone is an amazing device. ... Not seeing it is not the issue — the issue is not being able to see it any other way." JT's argument is that these are not verifiable facts we are discussing. We are discussing opinions. But he also states that Android is polished. We would all be better off if he wrote an article titled "Android Is Polished" and listed the polish point for point.

Daishiman 15y ago
But the thing is this post doesn't have anything to do about whether Android is polished or not. It's a direct attack at the general posturing of Gruber and MG. And I see nothing wrong with that as it is clearly stated, and Joshua's reviews have made it clear where the phones shine and where they do not.
sanderjd 15y ago
I read his article less as a refutation than as a "get off my side!" argument. He seems to fundamentally agree with Gruber and MG but fundamentally disagree with their presentation of the argument. This is similar to how many of my friends and family members believe homosexuality to be immoral but believe picketing the funerals of gay people with offensive signs is awful. The Pyramid of Refutation (which is new to me and awesome, by the way) doesn't apply because the goal is not to refute.
- imrehg 15y ago
  Wouldn't that be the "responding to the tone" part, 3rd from the bottom? That's not very high up!
keithpeter 15y ago
Let me point you to the Pyramid of Refutation. http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg Nice, that is going on the projector for the teenagers when we go back to teaching.
kenjackson 15y ago
Calling Gruber and MG Apple evangelists does not refute their central point. What's Gruber's central point? To quote Gruber: "You either see it or you don't." How do you refute that? His central point is that you can't attack my central point, because you can't see it. His central point is that you can't see god, because you don't have enough faith. It's not falsifiable. Give me falsifiable metrics that could, at least in theory, be refuted and I'd be happy to look at them. But you can't trot out the pyramid of refutation when they've made your central point vacuous.
- eigenvector 15y ago
  "It's not right. It's not even wrong." - Wolfgang Pauli[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
boso 15y ago
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3296691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3296691 offers an easy example of misleading information that is wholly true. It's not quite the same situation, of course, but it's a similarly difficult point of view to dissect. ("He's only telling you things that will make you want to support (the Cold War|Apple).")

by pkaler 15y ago

Daishiman 15y ago

But the thing is this post doesn't have anything to do about whether Android is polished or not. It's a direct attack at the general posturing of Gruber and MG. And I see nothing wrong with that as it is clearly stated, and Joshua's reviews have made it clear where the phones shine and where they do not.

sanderjd 15y ago

I read his article less as a refutation than as a "get off my side!" argument. He seems to fundamentally agree with Gruber and MG but fundamentally disagree with their presentation of the argument. This is similar to how many of my friends and family members believe homosexuality to be immoral but believe picketing the funerals of gay people with offensive signs is awful. The Pyramid of Refutation (which is new to me and awesome, by the way) doesn't apply because the goal is not to refute.

imrehg 15y ago
Wouldn't that be the "responding to the tone" part, 3rd from the bottom? That's not very high up!

keithpeter 15y ago

Let me point you to the Pyramid of Refutation. http://i.imgur.com/QhGkT.jpg Nice, that is going on the projector for the teenagers when we go back to teaching.

kenjackson 15y ago

Calling Gruber and MG Apple evangelists does not refute their central point. What's Gruber's central point? To quote Gruber: "You either see it or you don't." How do you refute that? His central point is that you can't attack my central point, because you can't see it. His central point is that you can't see god, because you don't have enough faith. It's not falsifiable. Give me falsifiable metrics that could, at least in theory, be refuted and I'd be happy to look at them. But you can't trot out the pyramid of refutation when they've made your central point vacuous.

eigenvector 15y ago
"It's not right. It's not even wrong." - Wolfgang Pauli[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

boso 15y ago

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3296691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3296691 offers an easy example of misleading information that is wholly true. It's not quite the same situation, of course, but it's a similarly difficult point of view to dissect. ("He's only telling you things that will make you want to support (the Cold War|Apple).")