This of course, doesn't represent the "quality" of an article, which I would argue is determined by its truth value. It is entirely possible that this consensus process actually LOWERS the truth value of an article. If the truth is offensive to the other side, it is contested.
Why am I supposed to think otherwise? What is the point of this whole tweet then? "Your presumption is that there is a truth. Demonstrate it, and we can then save ourselves the trouble of testing and debating. You'll be humanity's greatest champion, forever remembered."
-
-
The point is you can't demonstrate the truth of a proposition without examining it. Part of examination is testing and debate. The notion that one can reliably and demonstrably arrive at truth without examination is codswallop.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.