4 ms·
This is patently absurd. The author fleshes out a rich and detailed argument for comparing/contrasting rather than one-sided criticism as a way to provide feedb
by mcgwiz 14y ago
This is patently absurd. The author fleshes out a rich and detailed argument for comparing/contrasting rather than one-sided criticism as a way to provide feedback, but your best refutation of it is to point at the one sentence in which he cited someone you feel is of dubious credibility and proclaim "Therefore he's dumb!"
Oh, but you said "proper" criticism. I get it now.
- benatkin 14y agoIt isn't rich and detailed. It's a wall of text from someone who is bad at arguing.
- mcgwiz 14y agoEither way, there is more to it than Dale Carnegie.
- hso9791 14y agoWell, when reading the text, the reference to Dale Carnegie's work - as well as the author's reflections on that - constitute the pivotal point of the chapter "Why criticism is bad". Without that, what is left except feelings and such? He even repeats a claim that 99% of people one criticizes "will not see themselves to blame anyway." That is not how we reached our modern science and academia. Furthermore, he advises: "It is amazing how often it is you end up in a chair across from someone at a table interviewing you for a job you really need who happens to have worked on an open source project you publically condemned. Whoops." If one's criticism is well-argued, this may in fact be the tipping point that secures the job. If the criticism was a one-liner on twitter, it may spark a dialogue that generates mutual respect. My issue with the post is that it throws the baby - ugly or not - out with the bath water.
- andrewcooke 14y agoyou should write so that it doesn't read like you are trying so hard.