3 ms·
I agree that Wikipedia wasn't the best source to go for criticism: Wikipedia is very sympathetic to the claims like in the book, so the criticism section is ver
by eru 1y ago
I agree that Wikipedia wasn't the best source to go for criticism: Wikipedia is very sympathetic to the claims like in the book, so the criticism section is very weak sauce.
It is indeed noble that the authors responded to the criticism, but unlike what Wikipedia seems to imply, they didn't manage to rescue their argument.
See https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/03/the-spirit-level-delusion.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/03/th... from another comment.
- trust_bt_verify 1y agoA blog post referencing another blog post doesn’t seem to rise to the level of total disregard for the original study. But maybe we can try Wikipedia again.
- bluGill 1y agoa book is not a study a either.