If you’re willing to satisfy my curiosity, what’s that specific issue? Would an argument falsifying his position on that issue amount to a refutation of the central argument of the book? If not, wouldn’t your essay just be ineligible?
The issue I have in mind wasn’t explicitly cited in the canonical summary he gives in the FAQ, but I asked Sam personally and he said the issue qualifies as ‘central’. I can give you more details in February. :)
If you’re willing to satisfy my curiosity, what’s that specific issue? Would an argument falsifying his position on that issue amount to a refutation of the central argument of the book? If not, wouldn’t your essay just be ineligible?
The issue I have in mind wasn’t explicitly cited in the canonical summary he gives in the FAQ, but I asked Sam personally and he said the issue qualifies as ‘central’. I can give you more details in February. :)