I rarely post, only read in hopes of learning. Today, I comment: I appreciate the beauty of this post.
Thank you, Eliezer.
"The least convenient path is the only valid one."
When arguing against and idea honestly with the strongest advocates, is it always true that what is right is not always what is easy? Does making the choice not to argue make someone wrong outright or does not entering into the argument in the first place make the point of view non-existent in some way?
PK: I think the person's question around experience and description might have been asking about reductionism vs. holism.
I thought flaming was for the MMORPG boards?