What do you mean by “hard to resolve to convo with Richard”? I can’t parse that grammar.
I didn’t downvote those comments, but if you interpret me as saying “More rigour for important arguments please”, and Wei as saying “I’m too lazy to provide this rigour”, then I can see why someone might have downvoted them.
Like, on one level I’m fine with Wei having different epistemic standards to me, and I appreciate his engagement. And I definitely don’t intend my arguments as attacks on Wei specifically, since he puts much more effort into making intellectual progress than almost anyone on this site.
But on another level, the whole point of this site is to have higher epistemic standards, and (I would argue) the main thing preventing that is just people being so happy to accept blog-post-sized insights without further scrutiny.
What do you mean by “hard to resolve to convo with Richard”? I can’t parse that grammar.
I didn’t downvote those comments, but if you interpret me as saying “More rigour for important arguments please”, and Wei as saying “I’m too lazy to provide this rigour”, then I can see why someone might have downvoted them.
Like, on one level I’m fine with Wei having different epistemic standards to me, and I appreciate his engagement. And I definitely don’t intend my arguments as attacks on Wei specifically, since he puts much more effort into making intellectual progress than almost anyone on this site.
But on another level, the whole point of this site is to have higher epistemic standards, and (I would argue) the main thing preventing that is just people being so happy to accept blog-post-sized insights without further scrutiny.