721
Can any scientists confirm this important fact? (piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 year ago by [M] to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
101 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

You're very lenient with what you call a skill considering the part I mentioned doesn't convey any reasoning. Maybe I'm glossing over something but to me it sounds like a bunch of self-righteous filler. I'm not arguing with the contents of the statement that follows, I actually agree there. I just felt compelled to address the pretentiousness because it almost made me skip the informational part.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    "This claim leans heavily into anthropomorphizing non-human things, and that is very rare in rigorous science. Therefore I suspect this is not an accurate representation of rigorous science."

    1. Is clear and valid reasoning

    2. Is clearly conveyed by the part you mentioned

    3. Presents a straightforward reasoning tool people can apply more generally to help them identify cases where scientific results are likely being misrepresented. Exactly the kind of tool that someone can adopt to become better at applying critical thinking in their life.

    4. Is much more useful in a broader set of circumstances than the more specific arguments that appear later in the comment to further deconstruct this specific case.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent