Robin Hanson, in a gracious response to a post of mine, wrote:
>My main point was that as a matter of principle
>one should acknowledge the main problems with
>any theory one advocates.
I agree with you completely, and rise in support of the practice of
presenting all the facts one has, those in support and those which are
problematic. This reflects what I view as the difference between 'debate'
and 'discussion'. In a debate winning or losing is the goal and
forthrightness and intellectual honesty take a back seat. I try to stay
out of debates because they are vastly less productive of new insights.
Discussion, on the other hand, doesn't--or shouldn't--suffer from the
concern that you may 'lose' if you acknowledge the limitations/weaknesses
of your own expertise and the theory you are advocating.
Best, Jeff Davis
"Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
Ray Charles
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:19 MDT