3 ms·
That's because your comment is a logical fallacy -- a false dichotomy. You claim that the article portrays a search for single or few causes of intelligence/cre
by ihsw 13y ago
That's because your comment is a logical fallacy -- a false dichotomy. You claim that the article portrays a search for single or few causes of intelligence/creativity, however the article doesn't argue that. The title -- "Study finds spatial skill is early sign of creativity" -- doesn't indicate that the only early sign of creativity is only measuring spatial skill, but instead it claims that a study's results demonstrate that spatial skill is one early sign of creativity.
You also claim that it's a bad idea to 'absolutely follow' these studies (what does it mean to absolutely follow a study?) but nobody is advocating that -- neither the article nor anybody commenting here.
Furthermore, complaining about downvotes is a surefire way to get more downvotes. Such complaints add little to the conversation, and it implies that you deserve to be upvoted regardless of the content of your post.
- wslh 13y agoYou argued like a robot. I am commenting in HN not writing a paper on logic here. Look at the edges of what I said. Strangely I never had this extreme feedback from the HN community in my previous community participation. So, to me it seems that someone needs to go to run in the park for a while.
- ihsw 13y agoPlease don't attack my methods of persuasion or pretend you know who I am, there's nothing wrong with arguing like a robot and my park attendance is none of your business. Also, you didn't address my argument about how you're drawing conclusions that are irrelevant to the news article, but instead you made personal attacks against me. Stay classy.