Again, I’m not sure how relevant this is to your goals, but if you’re trying to reach some kind of academic audience a la Chalmers’ paper, then you should probably say “we will argue in chapter X that …”
You are also making lots of specific claims, .e.g “unless a global catastrophe stop scientific progress”—are there really no other scenarios? In constructing a well-reasoned argument, you want to avoid as much of this unnecessary vulnerability—people will quote this out of context and then dismiss your entire book
I repeat that this is the intro. I don’t argue for anything here. That comes later. Read the openings of any other academic work. They do not contain arguments. They contain previews of what will be argued.
He seems to be going into details about those other points in part 2, which he already posted.
Interestingly, I think he should go into less details about those scenarios, to avoid boring his audience and losing them in irrelevant detail. Which goes to show there’s no pleasing everybody.
Yeah; this is only the intro. I’m going to revisit all this material in more detail in the very next section.
Again, I’m not sure how relevant this is to your goals, but if you’re trying to reach some kind of academic audience a la Chalmers’ paper, then you should probably say “we will argue in chapter X that …”
You are also making lots of specific claims, .e.g “unless a global catastrophe stop scientific progress”—are there really no other scenarios? In constructing a well-reasoned argument, you want to avoid as much of this unnecessary vulnerability—people will quote this out of context and then dismiss your entire book
I repeat that this is the intro. I don’t argue for anything here. That comes later. Read the openings of any other academic work. They do not contain arguments. They contain previews of what will be argued.
He seems to be going into details about those other points in part 2, which he already posted.
Interestingly, I think he should go into less details about those scenarios, to avoid boring his audience and losing them in irrelevant detail. Which goes to show there’s no pleasing everybody.
Yeah, like most books for academics, this is definitely a book only for people who are highly interested in this very narrow topic.