But that still doesn’t tell you whether to invest in the startup. If an ORSA-er is just paralyzed by indecision here and decides to leave VC and go into theoretical math or whatever, he or she is not really winning.
Unrelatedly, a fun example of MWA triumphing over ORSA could be geologists vs. physicists on the age of the Earth.
But that still doesn’t tell you whether to invest in the startup. If an ORSA-er is just paralyzed by indecision here and decides to leave VC and go into theoretical math or whatever, he or she is not really winning.
I would guess that ORSA doesn’t suffice to be a successful VC. The claim is that it could help, in conjunction with MWAs.
If you scrutinize the weak arguments and find that the break down in different ways, then that suggests that the arguments are independent, and that you should invest in the start-up. If you find that they break down in the same way, then that suggests that you shouldn’t invest in the start-up.
But that still doesn’t tell you whether to invest in the startup. If an ORSA-er is just paralyzed by indecision here and decides to leave VC and go into theoretical math or whatever, he or she is not really winning.
Unrelatedly, a fun example of MWA triumphing over ORSA could be geologists vs. physicists on the age of the Earth.
I would guess that ORSA doesn’t suffice to be a successful VC. The claim is that it could help, in conjunction with MWAs.
If you scrutinize the weak arguments and find that the break down in different ways, then that suggests that the arguments are independent, and that you should invest in the start-up. If you find that they break down in the same way, then that suggests that you shouldn’t invest in the start-up.