Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by eru 3182 days ago
You should still be able to give the other side the best defense imaginable. (See 'steelmanning'.)
1 comments
bryanrasmussen 3182 days ago
ok, I've seen stellmanning? https://www.google.com/search?dcr=0&source=hp&q=stellmanning...

on edit: never mind, I see you mean steelmanning. However that does not really have anything to do with what I said, you should be able to give someone the best defence imaginable, but what if the best defence imaginable is shit compared to the other side. Then you cannot argue both sides equally, this does not mean you do not understand either side. It means one side is actually wrong, and the other is correct.

link
eru 3182 days ago
Sorry, I can't spell. It's steelmanning. (Edited the other comment.)

The idea is to beat a steelman of the idea. Because that's a greater victory than beating a strawman.

link
eru 3181 days ago
Sure. Eg you'd be hard pressed finding good arguments for 2=3 (without resorting to shenanigans around definitions).
link