2 ms·
I’m not embarrassed. I occasionally explore contrarian interpretations of events in order to Cunningham a reasonable argument against them into existence. It’s
by basil-rash 3y ago
I’m not embarrassed. I occasionally explore contrarian interpretations of events in order to Cunningham a reasonable argument against them into existence. It’s a good exercise in reevaluating one’s internal implicit biases: if no argument exists against hypothesis H, one should reject that hypothesis in favor of the null.
In this case the only argument is “I read a book that says X is good”, which isn’t much of an argument at all. Null hypothesis is looking strong.
You however should be embarrassed for suggesting folks opinions don’t matter if they haven’t read the same books as you.
- chx 3y agoYou completely misunderstood what happened here. I do not argue with you because it's pointless. I recommended a book as a starter in order to get to a point where we can have a discussion. Some things can't be explained in a short comment. You embarrassed yourself not with the statement itself but that it makes crystal clear you have no idea about what underpinnings of a modern state, its interaction with society and so forth.
- basil-rash 3y agoNo argument against ~H, or for H, that is.