|
|
|
|
|
|
by m01
1890 days ago
|
|
|
I enjoyed reading the article. However, I think the author is over-generalising a bit with targeting this at "non-fiction" authors. #1 & #2 are perhaps broadly aplicable, but #3 & #4 seem more geared towards self-help books, books about management and the like. I suspect people who read a memoir, an auto-biography, an eulogy or about true crime may well be interested in reading about a topic rather than looking for actionable advice? |
|
|
Those don't classify as the type of non-fiction problem solving books we're talking about.
All models and methods are an approximation of the world (excluding pure mathematics). That error in approximation creates problems when you don't respect the domain of validity of the theory.
Right now, what you claim as over-generalising, I argue is you taking our theory outside its domain of validity.
I agree that it breaks there, but that's only because it wasn't designed for that domain so it's kind of a strawman argument.