[kazinator]

Conclusions that don't conclude, but re-state the introduction are bade?

But that just follows from the time-honored recipe for essay writing:

1. First tell 'em whatcha gonna tell em.

2. Then tell 'em.

3. Then tell 'em whatcha told 'em.

To conclude doesn't mean to draw some new logical inference, but just to bring the paper or talk to an end.

You don't introduce anything new in a conclusion.

Not any kind of conclusion.

E.g. a musical symphony will rarely introduce entirely new themes in the last bars. Instead various ending devices occur, like condensed re-statements of themes that occurred previously.

[BeetleB]

The author did acknowledge what you say:

> The dictum is, ``Tell them what you're going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you told them.''

He is simply disagreeing with this advice. It's time honored, but people are allowed to have their opinions, and I tend to agree with him on this one.[1]

As an aside, I really dislike Powerpoint presentations that include a TOC[2] and simply repeat (almost verbatim) what they've already talked about. I will acknowledge that some people like this, so I don't complain about it. However, I do think there's a very good reason you don't find TED talks following this format.

[1] Or rather, I think it takes a lot of skill to follow this advice well, and most people simply repeat themselves in a trivial way, which I find pointless.

[2] The only thing it's good for is deciding if I want to listen to the talk at all (e.g. I expect an overview talk and see that the presenter is going to into more detail than I care for).