Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Even the devil's advocate [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate ] is supposed to cite facts and reason properly -- not claim a falsehood in support of the devil, which misrepresenting the article is.

You can't just precede anything with "just playing devil's advocate for a moment" and make it immune from scrutiny, that's the intellectual equivalent of "just a prank". From the WP article, emphasis mine:

> explore the thought further using a valid reasoning



I welcome scrutiny, and I disagree with this particular scrutiny.


I could have just done the same, and just say "I disagree" without making an argument, but that's not really much of a discussion is it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: