A research methodology is not a first principle. A first principle is “a basic, foundational proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition or assumption.”
OK, now we are at the definitions stage, so there is no point in arguing about them. Just ask EY which definition he meant, if any, and be done with it.
I’m the one who introduced the term “first principles”, so I am the one who should be asked what definition I meant. Given that my original point was differentiating between the two value-sets, and that I was trying to convey the distinction between “figuring it out for yourself” as opposed to “being exposed to the answer”—I have to say that your continuing to re-introduce the notion of “look it up” just… isn’t very helpful to the conversation.
I ask you again; would you agree that unless you were exposed to the datapoint of what caused FDR’s paralysis, you could have no way of figuring it out for yourself?
(Note: “looking it up” is not an answer to this question. That would be a form of getting exposure to the datapoint.)
If you aren’t interested in how I define a term that I introduced to the discussion as opposed to how someone who never used said term would define it, I don’t know what you’re doing but I do know two things:
A research methodology is not a first principle. A first principle is “a basic, foundational proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition or assumption.”
That is why not.
OK, now we are at the definitions stage, so there is no point in arguing about them. Just ask EY which definition he meant, if any, and be done with it.
I’m the one who introduced the term “first principles”, so I am the one who should be asked what definition I meant. Given that my original point was differentiating between the two value-sets, and that I was trying to convey the distinction between “figuring it out for yourself” as opposed to “being exposed to the answer”—I have to say that your continuing to re-introduce the notion of “look it up” just… isn’t very helpful to the conversation.
I ask you again; would you agree that unless you were exposed to the datapoint of what caused FDR’s paralysis, you could have no way of figuring it out for yourself?
(Note: “looking it up” is not an answer to this question. That would be a form of getting exposure to the datapoint.)
I don’t care about your personal definition since the original statement was EY’s.
If you aren’t interested in how I define a term that I introduced to the discussion as opposed to how someone who never used said term would define it, I don’t know what you’re doing but I do know two things:
It is not engaging in rational discourse.
I will not be a participant in it.