“You cannot rely on anyone else to argue you out of your mistakes; you cannot rely on anyone else to save you; you and only you are obligated to find the flaws in your positions”
It wasn’t much of an “aha!” moment- when I first read it, I thought something along the lines of “Of course higher standards are possible, but if no one can find flaws in your argument, you’re doing pretty well.” but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that EY made a good point. I had later stumbled upon flaws in my long standing arguments that I had overlooked, yet no one called me on.
Not only was the standard lower than I had previously realized, but it is entirely possible for someone to 1) not believe you 2) not be able put their refutation into words, and 3) still be right.
The big problem with relying on someone else to save you is “Why would they bother?”. No one is likely to be as motivated to find mistakes in your beliefs are you are (or at least as you should be).
“You cannot rely on anyone else to argue you out of your mistakes; you cannot rely on anyone else to save you; you and only you are obligated to find the flaws in your positions”
It wasn’t much of an “aha!” moment- when I first read it, I thought something along the lines of “Of course higher standards are possible, but if no one can find flaws in your argument, you’re doing pretty well.” but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that EY made a good point. I had later stumbled upon flaws in my long standing arguments that I had overlooked, yet no one called me on.
Not only was the standard lower than I had previously realized, but it is entirely possible for someone to 1) not believe you 2) not be able put their refutation into words, and 3) still be right.
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/09/refutation-prod.html
The big problem with relying on someone else to save you is “Why would they bother?”. No one is likely to be as motivated to find mistakes in your beliefs are you are (or at least as you should be).