How about “work on formalizing the problem (silently or collaboratively, whatever your style is) and do not defend a position that cannot be successfully defended or refuted”?
Fair enough. Is there a clear way to distinguish positions worth arguing without formality (e.g., the one you are arguing here) from those that aren’t (e.g., the one you are arguing ought not be argued here)?
How about “work on formalizing the problem (silently or collaboratively, whatever your style is) and do not defend a position that cannot be successfully defended or refuted”?
Fair enough.
Is there a clear way to distinguish positions worth arguing without formality (e.g., the one you are arguing here) from those that aren’t (e.g., the one you are arguing ought not be argued here)?
It’s a good question. There ought to be, but I am not sure where the dividing line is.