Argument purely from motive seems weak to me. It can too easily be self-deluding.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @WokeCapital
You asked for a motive and I gave you one
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
... I'm sure you don't find arguments of the kind "I think X did Y because it would be in their interest to do so" convincing in general.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
... It certainly doesn't rise to the level of "I think X did Y because we saw them do."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @WokeCapital
I keep noticing yourself and Spandrell do this tactical refusal to infer from second order effects as soon as China is involved. Doesn't take a genius to notice it, or figure out why.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BeigeShiba @WokeCapital
If I ever infer from motive, I regret it. It's a degenerate mode of reasoning.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness @WokeCapital
And yet its predictive accuracy is acceptably high.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BeigeShiba @WokeCapital
Just not seeing why one would stoop to it, when we've got the murder weapon, the forensics, and a detailed confession in all the cases that matter.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @WokeCapital
If "Qui Bono" was good enough for Cicero, it's good enough for me.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
On this principle we have to differ.
-
New conversation
-
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.