« first day (1757 days earlier)      last day (1663 days later) » 

1:01 AM
@DanAndrews I'm sure you'd find a lot of good/informative content on 2600 even today.
 
Is there a name for this kind of "argument":
-4
A: Is it ethical to cherry-pick reviewers based on their previous reviews of your manuscript?

Bill Turnerif you have to ask if it is ethical, then it probably is not.

e.g. "If you have to ask if it's racist, then it is."
I thought you guys might know
 
Maybe an "appeal to common sense"
 
hmm I don't know
seems more like a faulty generalization, if anything
"Most of the time when people ask if something is ethical, it isn't; so if you're asking if something is ethical, it isn't."
 
 
4 hours later…
5:24 AM
@DanAndrews You keep changing your reference. Now it is compared to blog posts of 2015?
@ff524 But the answerer included the word "probably", so I don't think it is a faulty generalization. I think it is a useful rule of thumb. I've applied it myself.
 
@Oddthinking good point about the "probably" - but it still doesn't seem like much of an argument to me
 
@ff524 Oh, it isn't a sound logical argument. It isn't an answer to the question. It is a heuristic for shortcutting the need to think things through.
 
5:43 AM
@Oddthinking "a heuristic for shortcutting the need to think things through" - well put, can I steal that phrase?
 
@ff524 Sure. The wording is mine, but the concept isn't: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
 

« first day (1757 days earlier)      last day (1663 days later) »