4 ms·
just to be clear, for posterity: > Err... Noo? It was not what I meant. Yes it absolutely is what you meant, which is proven by your insisteneces here: > [..
by catapart 2y ago
just to be clear, for posterity:
> Err... Noo? It was not what I meant.
Yes it absolutely is what you meant, which is proven by your insisteneces here:
> [...]common sense should do?
> Yes I see that we require common sense[...]
what do you think "common sense" is? would it, maybe, be a certain "level" of "smart" that you think "non stupid" people have?
i honestly can't tell if you aren't able to recognize your criteria as biased, or if you're just philosophy trolling but that's when I dip out of the conversation, hence my other reply.
again, hope it all works out for you, or whatever!
- mdp2021 2y agoI do not see any bias in stating that the example you provided, about time vs quality priority, has trivially judged instances - trivial judgement operated by so-called "common sense", uneffortful reasoning.