Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
1–10 of 131 posts
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#2Is this article’s definition of strawman argument the accepted one? I don’t think it is arguing against your opponent’s weakest point. That’s just debate. To strawman you have to misrepresent your opponent’s position and then counter your own misrepresentation.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#3Is this article’s definition of strawman argument the accepted one? I don’t think it is arguing against your opponent’s weakest point. That’s just debate. To strawman you have to misrepresent your opponent’s position and then counter your own misrepresentation.
So what you're saying is that the author is arguing in bad faith and therefore we shouldn't trust anything they say? I think that is an entirely too unchairitable view to be taking in civil discourse, and frankly, the author deserves better.
^^^That's a strawman, I took something you didn't say, and argued against it. I did so because, you're right, the author didn't exactly use it correctly in this article, however, I want to feel important and self righteous by belittling everyone else on the internet, or sometimes in real life if I really don't like them.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#4Is this article’s definition of strawman argument the accepted one? I don’t think it is arguing against your opponent’s weakest point. That’s just debate. To strawman you have to misrepresent your opponent’s position and then counter your own misrepresentation.
So what you're saying is that the author is arguing in bad faith and therefore we shouldn't trust anything they say? I think that is an entirely too unchairitable view to be taking in civil discourse, and frankly, the author deserves better. ^^^That's a strawman, I took something you didn't say, and argued against it. I did so because, you're right, the author didn't exactly use it correctly in this article, however,…
I don’t understand your explanation for the reason for your comment.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#5I read the title and decided to strawman the author without reading further I decided the author is against steelmanning because they're a disingenuous fraud who simply wants to ruin the reputation of everybody who steel mans. Boom roasted.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#6In regard to the points brought up in the article -- one could say there is a case for maybe what you could call "premature steelmanning" or "poorly justified steelmanning" -- meaning that somebody is asking you to see their point from their perspective when minimal information or effort is used to justify the point in the first place. Like if somebody asked you to steelman the point that bigfoot exists. You ask for some evidence and they say that you are part of some conspiracy to cover up bigfoot. It is pretty unfortunate how challenging the situation around discussion of covid related topics has become -- but does make a bunch of sense since beyond the politics, many people were dramatically impacted by covid -- so asking people to have a rational conversation around things like keeping kids at home for a long time, losing their job, being asked to behave in certain ways in public -- is super hard to do without some sort of leadership to help move things in a positive direction. But then you end up with various leaders attempting to out maneuver each other, so it is super hard to deal with the situation.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#7I'm not sure that what Alexander was doing in that one instance nor what this author is talking about are "steelmanning". If in order to "steelman" your argument I also have to accept every point where you beg-the-question then where can there possibly be any argument?
I don't think I have to accept the argument that every fetus has an immortal soul to steelman a pro-life position. But I do however have to accept that the people making a pro-life argument are engaged in a good faith disagreement about when the state has an interest to protect the life of what is or will be one of its citizens (depending upon your definition).
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#8"Do not sympathize too much with jesus because you may turn to one of his followers"
I really hate this era of discourse. It's mostly dominated by emotionally-driven americans with juvenile opinions who take twitter and facebook too seriously. A dumbed down elite making dumb meta-arguments using the emotional drivels of the most vocal but equally dumb sample of humans as input data. Meanwhile, european intellectual social commentary has either completely stopped or is hidden deep inside academic meetings and is afraid to meet the public. The UK doesnt seem to have much to offer also, and the bleak russians seem to have decided on collective suicide.
What's left? I guess i will wait for GPT-41 to write an actual intellectully challenging novel
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#9I'm not sure that what Alexander was doing in that one instance nor what this author is talking about are "steelmanning". If in order to "steelman" your argument I also have to accept every point where you beg-the-question then where can there possibly be any argument? I don't think I have to accept the argument that every fetus has an immortal soul to steelman a pro-life position. But I do however have to accept tha…
What Scott is doing there is a hyper-advanced blogging technique called "making a joke" and he's using hyperbole to do it.
Re: Why I’m skeptical of “steelmanning”
#10"Do not sympathize too much with jesus because you may turn to one of his followers" I really hate this era of discourse. It's mostly dominated by emotionally-driven americans with juvenile opinions who take twitter and facebook too seriously. A dumbed down elite making dumb meta-arguments using the emotional drivels of the most vocal but equally dumb sample of humans as input data. Meanwhile, european intellectual s…
Tend to agree with your sentiment. What are, in your opinion, three undervalued novels from the last 100 years that you would consider to be among the highest human achievements in fiction?