Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Rather like minmaxing, once you encounter something severely discredited there's no point going on and you can prune that whole dialogue tree.

If people want to convince me, they need to lead with their strongest evidence.



Exactly. My personal catalog of "fast fail" heuristics. Alas, it takes a while to compile all the tropes, dog whistles, talking points.

> If people want to convince me, they need to lead with their strongest evidence.

Yes and:

I considered myself a Popperian. I used to think discourse and reason could solve all of our problems. Ha.

How do I talk to my creationist (for instance) family members? What can I say that hasn't been said before?

I can't. And even if I could, I don't have the resources or wherewithal to counterbalance the tsunami of noise.

So I adapted.

One consequence is I'm now a predictionist. Whatever that's called. (Utilitarian?) For public discourse, rhetoric, policy I no longer care about base truth, objective reality.

Just make some predictions and stand by them. How does a belief in creationism, young earth, supply side economics, herd immunity, or whatever (for instances) help me navigate the world?

As I aged, I had less drive to refute every utterance about astrology (for instance). Now I no longer feel compelled or obligated to refute any other given cult.

Okay, I think that's my rant. Oh my god, family can push our buttons.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: