3 ms·
So what? In your context, you would say "computers can math better than humans". I think that's uncontroversial. Crazy thing is, your difficulty with this sy
by throwawaymaths 3y ago
So what? In your context, you would say "computers can math better than humans". I think that's uncontroversial.
Crazy thing is, your difficulty with this syllogism proves my point about the median human.
- throwanem 3y agoWhatever their capacity for reason or lack thereof, I'll give LLMs this: I've never yet seen one resort to ad hominem for the lack of any more substantive counterargument.
- throwawaymaths 3y agoThe counterargument is substantive, and you're committing fallacy of fallacies anyways.
- throwanem 3y agoWhat syllogism of yours am I meant to be having trouble with here? Would you like to qualify your attempt to impugn my intelligence rather than countering my argument as something other than what I called it? The "fallacy fallacy" is a rather silly thing to cite in this connection; while there's merit in the point that a fallacious argument does not necessarily err in its conclusion, as far as I can tell you have not made an argument here. It is difficult to respond on substance whose presence is not yet evident.