3 ms·
I haven't gone beyond reading the page, but the intent matches my intuition that we need tools for better following (and agreeing upon?) good "geometries" for
by a9h74j 4y ago
I haven't gone beyond reading the page, but the intent matches my intuition that we need tools for better following (and agreeing upon?) good "geometries" for arguments.
- spockz 4y agoSame here. I call it “structured reasoning” in my mind. I have been eyeballing https://www.kialo.com/ https://www.kialo.com/ but I’m very hesitant to use it for company decisions.
- a9h74j 4y agoAs a sample, I just glanced at the UBI discussion there. Each claim pro and con, when clicked upon, seems to break into another level of claims pro and con. And apparently crowdsourced as well. Looks like a fantastic resource. Very much what I was hoping for.
- 082349872349872 4y agoWhen corporate email threads start getting lengthy, I like to flow* them. Too often it's not even a question of premises and conclusions, but rather I find technical threads get hung up on quibbling minor issues, while failing to engage ("arguing past each other") wrt fairly major points. * eg https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Questions-Judge-Training-Intro-to-Flowing.pdf https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Quest...