While I agree with what you’ve factually said, I think the post was aiming at times people instinctually understand they cannot argue a better answer. You’ve surely seen people build unsafe things and then try to argue that they “should have” worked, so arguing to that likely won’t convert anyone, but the author found resonance in the example of school exams.
My point was that we’re talking about getting the best answer assuming the professors also know the best answer. I feel like it’s nitpicking to go around diving deep in arguing about the assumptions. The point of the article still stands.
For what it’s worth, I, @tomcatfish, was agreeing with you, @ship_shlap, in general, while also stating that I agree with @Dagon.
I don’t think even Dagon was disagreeing outright with you, more noticing that if they expand your metaphor one more step it stops working for them. It’s pretty important when using a metaphor to note when it breaks down, and I actually like your point a bit more with their clarification because I can understand the full shape of your point a bit easier when I know what assumptions I’m meant to use.
While I agree with what you’ve factually said, I think the post was aiming at times people instinctually understand they cannot argue a better answer. You’ve surely seen people build unsafe things and then try to argue that they “should have” worked, so arguing to that likely won’t convert anyone, but the author found resonance in the example of school exams.
Again, I totally understand and agree with you about the whole “guessing the teacher’s password”-related bit.
My point was that we’re talking about getting the best answer assuming the professors also know the best answer. I feel like it’s nitpicking to go around diving deep in arguing about the assumptions. The point of the article still stands.
For what it’s worth, I, @tomcatfish, was agreeing with you, @ship_shlap, in general, while also stating that I agree with @Dagon.
I don’t think even Dagon was disagreeing outright with you, more noticing that if they expand your metaphor one more step it stops working for them. It’s pretty important when using a metaphor to note when it breaks down, and I actually like your point a bit more with their clarification because I can understand the full shape of your point a bit easier when I know what assumptions I’m meant to use.
The point of the article still stands for me too!