“There are two types of people: those who try to win and those who try to win arguments. They are never the same.”—Nassim Nicholas Taleb (HT: Fugitive Knowledge)
Perhaps, but it seems to be more likely that a focus on winning arguments is less useful then a focus on winning in general. Winning an argument may help you win on occasion; but as many lose sight of their goals in pursuit of a victorious argument, it seems more useful to hold the argument always in an instrumental sense, and never as an end in and of itself.
Clearly false. There are all sorts of situations in which argument winning is instrumentally useful.
Perhaps, but it seems to be more likely that a focus on winning arguments is less useful then a focus on winning in general. Winning an argument may help you win on occasion; but as many lose sight of their goals in pursuit of a victorious argument, it seems more useful to hold the argument always in an instrumental sense, and never as an end in and of itself.
Funny, reading The Black Swan, Taleb struck me as someone who was trying to win an argument.
(Though he did have a point)
I’m sorry. That was abuse.
Do you mean what Taleb did was abuse? (I’m confused)
The “abuse” quip is a Monty Python reference: The Argument Clinic.
!
That’s one of my favorite Monty Python sketches too. Drops head in shame