Writing a comprehensive theory of how to get ahead would be a titanic task, don’t you think?
I agree, it would. I just don’t think someone should go around calling what is at best a tiny part of being powerful the “laws of power,” and I think that doing so is evidence that these guys are trying to sell books before trying to actually find laws of power.
genetic fallacy
I prefer the term “evidence” :D The percentage of self-help books (even unusual ones, I’d bet) that get things right in a big-picture way is pretty low. Being right can be tested the same regardless of origin, but when strong tests are impractical and we have to reason with the information we’ve got, we can’t ignore that whether something is true is correlated with how reliable its source is.
Writing a comprehensive theory of how to get ahead would be a titanic task, don’t you think? Anyway, the intent with which the book was written doesn’t invalidate the content, and at least you should agree this isn’t the usual self-help book, which tend to advocate Lawful Good attitudes..
I agree, it would. I just don’t think someone should go around calling what is at best a tiny part of being powerful the “laws of power,” and I think that doing so is evidence that these guys are trying to sell books before trying to actually find laws of power.
I prefer the term “evidence” :D The percentage of self-help books (even unusual ones, I’d bet) that get things right in a big-picture way is pretty low. Being right can be tested the same regardless of origin, but when strong tests are impractical and we have to reason with the information we’ve got, we can’t ignore that whether something is true is correlated with how reliable its source is.