I noticed a weird thing about writing that if you’re trying to prove a point and use too many arguments (beyond 2-3) then it ends up coming off as weaker in aggregate. Is this a real thing?
Show this thread
-
A theory I have is that this might sort of be a rational Bayesian thing. If someone lists 10 arguments for something and 0 against, it’s more likely they are cherry picking arguments and/or have an ulterior motive. People sniff that out.
Show this thread
Worth taking seriously the idea that, in the real order of things, things *really do* have just 1-2 explanations, and we have some grasp of this and accept arguments conforming to that principle as stronger.
