Re: I\'m Technically Wrong On One Aspect of My Debate With Txaq
"I wonder if DS thinks the fact that there are many poker theories that contradict or disagree with him lowers the probability that his theory is correct. There are hundreds if not thousands of poker books. Why read Sklansky? Don't some of his books mention "detractors"? Would that statement be worthless?"
Yes, Not Ready, the existence of those other books DOES lower the probability that my theories are correct. And I can't wiggle out of that fact by alluding to any mentions by me of detractors. Atheists, Enlightened, Poker Authors, and Conservative Christians, must all understand that myriad detractors is a LEGITIMATE objection, that an outsider can bring up and they must meet the objection to HIS satisfaction.
On the other hand this is all a fine point. It wouldn't be if 99.999% of people are SURE a theory is wrong because historically only a very small fraction of theories that had this much opposition turned out right. Only 90% of people disagreeing with something should make you think twice and double check your ideas but then you go on and make your case. But it SHOULD make you think twice. And txaq was seemingly disagreeing with that.
|