I was revisiting some discussions you and I have been having - One of the pitfalls we ran into was changing subjects in the middle of a disagreement.
So, for example, one rule could be "We can't change subjects. If we disagree on A we keep talking about A without moving to B or C".
To help us...
I thought I'd open a thread dedicated to all things AI. While we're very, very far from Singularity-like scenarios, AI is making considerable improvements in some areas.
hide-and-seek machine learning (3m)
Well, "Within my own biases" is one thing we should try and remove from the debating equation. I am sure I have biases as much as you do. I'm sure I ran into a few pitfalls myself when arguing with you. For example, on occasion, I just wanted to make a quick point and used sources without...
@Jon, did you have any more thoughts about this?
I'm referring specifically to discussing how people (for example you and I) might go about debating issues where there is a strong disagreement, avoiding the various irrational pitfalls, making a good-quality case, and so on.
To be super-clear...
I was incorrect when I wrote "There's no one sentence synopsis. " - what I should have written was "there is no easy answer to where the balance lies, because the balance changes according to person and situation".
There is, in fact, a segment long just over 1 minute, which gives you a sense...
There's no one sentence synopsis.
The video explains the dangers of 'thinking in categories' (two such categories possibly being nature and nurture), and drives viewers towards a much more nuanced approach. There is no simple way to answer it.
What prompted you to suggest any of the above?
Well, this acquaintance of yours certainly seems to have a unique character.
Fair enough. I may very well have stereotypical views about "right" priorities. For example, I may consider not being homeless a priority.
But you're right - this does...
I agree that my prior post sounds more like a thought experiment. I also agree that things are less clear cut in the real world.
For example, in the real world there are undoubtedly many pitfalls that two reasonable people debating would have to watch out for.
But my point is, in order to get...
@Jon let's have a scenario where person A and person B are two reasonable individuals who disagree on topics X, Y and Z
Let's also say that there is a set of facts or data available to an objective observer. Thanks to this data the objective observer can see that
on topic X, Person A is right...
I strongly believe that when there is strong communication and a desire to get to the bottom of the truth from people who have opposing views, it is possible to come to a better understanding.
I will elaborate in the next few days about this.