Yaroven

I may be misunderstanding the intended scope of the post, but currently the argument reads to me more like a critique of some probabilistic frameworks than a critique of probabilistic reasoning in general.

Epistemic status: similar to author, most prior work I read is scattered across many, often very confusingly written blog posts, and I can't easily tell where I first came across various ideas. I tried to focus on "general" deductive logic based on my reading of the post (which may be wrong) instead of applying stuff that is too framework-specific.

I will ... (read more)

I think this phenomenon can be likened to strawmanning, since both include defense against an imagined version of the "actual meaning". More exactly, I think it can be considered an instance of "subtext strawmanning", since it probably came from applying exaggerations to the connotation of the criticism, using logic like "criticism => impolite => disrespectful => threatening => actual danger". 

In general, paying attention to the way in which parties interpret fallaciously aspects of a discussion other than the actual logic seems like a use... (read more)