I have about eight hundred blog posts, with an average length of 3000 words each, arguing for my actual beliefs.
-
-
Replying to @slatestarcodex @FreequentFlyr
But shouldn't you just reduce your nuanced beliefs about complex topics down to pithy 140-character sayings?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
What if your intuitions about the validity and effectiveness of lengthy arguments are wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emusdrinking @FreequentFlyr
Effectiveness? I think
@slatestarcodex was usually explaining, not trying to convince you of something.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
"All language is sermonic." - Weaver in 140 or fewer characters
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Absolutely. If the strongest form of your argument can't be made on Twitter it's probably not worth making.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FreequentFlyr
If you can "argue" in 140 characters, you're probably not giving any evidence or addressing any real issues.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex
In my view disputing the adequacy of evidence is a way to evade stating your actual views.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FreequentFlyr @slatestarcodex
If I say "we should have a universal basic income" and you say "the evidence is muddled" only one of us has made an argument.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FreequentFlyr
Very confused. If you support UBI, great that you have thesis, but unconvincing until you give evidence.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Doubt you can give enough evidence to convert a skeptic in 140-character format.
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.