I disagree; I watched Eliezer vs Adam Frank, and at several points I paused it, trying to work out what I’d say in response to Frank’s arguments. I still found that Eliezer got across the counterarguments in a far neater way when I unpaused, and he had a lot less time than I did.
(BTW, after hearing that I also learned how his name is pronounced, so I’m better at spelling it correctly: it’s Eli-Ezer, four syllables.)
I disagree; I watched Eliezer vs Adam Frank, and at several points I paused it, trying to work out what I’d say in response to Frank’s arguments. I still found that Eliezer got across the counterarguments in a far neater way when I unpaused, and he had a lot less time than I did.
I have not observed that getting across counterarguments in a neat way is a particularly vital element of what it takes to ‘win’ a debate.
I’d read Frank’s book. (And I did try to direct him to the webpages whereby he could have read my stuff.) But I think I could’ve done it equally well on the fly.
I disagree; I watched Eliezer vs Adam Frank, and at several points I paused it, trying to work out what I’d say in response to Frank’s arguments. I still found that Eliezer got across the counterarguments in a far neater way when I unpaused, and he had a lot less time than I did.
(BTW, after hearing that I also learned how his name is pronounced, so I’m better at spelling it correctly: it’s Eli-Ezer, four syllables.)
I have not observed that getting across counterarguments in a neat way is a particularly vital element of what it takes to ‘win’ a debate.
I’d read Frank’s book. (And I did try to direct him to the webpages whereby he could have read my stuff.) But I think I could’ve done it equally well on the fly.