A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#1

Post by DrHilarius » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 10:31 PM UTC

A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin
doyourownresearch.substack.com

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#2

Post by adolph » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 10:41 PM UTC

The lesson I took away has never abandoned me. Not only can people in power be badly mistaken in matters pertaining to their fields of expertise, but internet communities can dig into a situation deep enough to figure out in real-time that said people in power are wrong.

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#3

Post by dekhn » Thu, Dec 16, 2021, 3:14 PM UTC

flagged because aspiring philosophers are not qualified to evaluate medical studies.

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#4

Post by DrHilarius » Thu, Dec 16, 2021, 7:02 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #3

flagged because aspiring philosophers are not qualified to evaluate medical studies.

Would think it would then be a trivial matter to point to some sort of actual errors in reasoning or conclusions in the actual post.

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#5

Post by jb1991 » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 9:17 AM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #3

flagged because aspiring philosophers are not qualified to evaluate medical studies.

I notice you often flag articles without actually diving into them to see if they are in fact without the merit you claim.

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#6

Post by jb1991 » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 9:17 AM UTC

DrHilarius wrote: post #4

dekhn wrote: post #3

flagged because aspiring philosophers are not qualified to evaluate medical studies.

Would think it would then be a trivial matter to point to some sort of actual errors in reasoning or conclusions in the actual post.

This is the MO of the OP.

Re: A Conflict of Blurred Visions: Response to Scott Alexander on Ivermectin

#7

Post by dekhn » Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 3:01 PM UTC

jb1991 wrote: post #5

dekhn wrote: post #3

flagged because aspiring philosophers are not qualified to evaluate medical studies.

I notice you often flag articles without actually diving into them to see if they are in fact without the merit you claim.

I read the article, it's not very useful.

Philosophers writing about ivermectin are just wasting everybody's time. The medical community moved on a while ago.