[getnormality]

There is much less to this essay than meets the eye. It boils down to this:

1. The author thinks "it turns out" should only be used to express discovery of objectively surprising facts.

2. Paul Graham sometimes uses "it turns out" to express discovery of subjectively surprising facts.

3. The author finds the difference between his opinion and Paul Graham's opinion objectionable.

It turns out that people use stock phrases in different ways!

[dap]

I don’t think that sums up the post well. I would say:

The phrase “it turns out” has a surprising way of disarming skepticism in readers. While surprising, it’s easy to understand: the phrase suggests a story of the author’s journey of believing one thing, investigating, and finding something different. That’s more credible than simply saying the thing they now believe. The touch of vulnerability (admitting being wrong) avoids the reader’s ego getting defensive when asked to admit they were wrong. The net result is that it’s surprisingly easy to be convinced without any real argument.

I’ve noticed this as well (often in podcasts and programs like Radiolab) and I think it’s quite valuable to just be aware of it as a reader/listener, if you care about thinking critically about your own beliefs.

[getnormality]

Yes, the post is evaluating a personal essay of subjective experiences as if it is an obscured mechanism for convincing people about factual claims.