<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dw="https://www.dreamwidth.org">
  <id>tag:dreamwidth.org,2009-04-14:61366</id>
  <title>jack</title>
  <subtitle>jack</subtitle>
  <author>
    <name>jack</name>
  </author>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://jack.dreamwidth.org/"/>
  <link rel="self" type="text/xml" href="https://jack.dreamwidth.org/data/atom"/>
  <updated>2011-01-09T13:08:25Z</updated>
  <dw:journal username="jack" type="personal"/>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:dreamwidth.org,2009-04-14:61366:685752</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://jack.dreamwidth.org/685752.html"/>
    <link rel="self" type="text/xml" href="https://jack.dreamwidth.org/data/atom/?itemid=685752"/>
    <title>Bracketing the target</title>
    <published>2011-01-09T13:08:25Z</published>
    <updated>2011-01-09T13:08:25Z</updated>
    <category term="philsophy"/>
    <category term="witterings"/>
    <dw:security>public</dw:security>
    <dw:reply-count>5</dw:reply-count>
    <content type="html">If you're firing a howitzer, get two shells on either side of the target, and then you can quickly home in on it using a simple (often trivial) binary chop. This may actually be better than two shells very very close but on the same side.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The same often applies to arguments: a totally crazy but totally different idea may be more useful than a cautious but unassailable refinement of the previous suggestion if the best answer is contained somewhere between. For instance:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(a) This is what people mean (or should mean) but "there are no stupid suggestions" -- even a ridiculous suggestion can contain a nugget of an undeveloped good idea or useful constraint. (Not always, but often.)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(b) If you're trying to get someone to grok something, you may say "it's a bit like [this film] and a bit like [this film]" or "it's a bit like a wave and a bit like a particle" or "it's a bit like a religion and a bit like a culture" then even if both examples are totally and utterly false, they may well give people a good intuitive idea of the domain of answers within which the correct one lies.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(c) if you come up with a long, complex philosophical argument, spend five minutes saying "would this be convincing to an intelligent person who doesn't know anything about philosophy, or would they say 'well, I can't tell you exactly where the flaw is, but I'm pretty sure it's false because here's a counterexample'"&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="https://www.dreamwidth.org/tools/commentcount?user=jack&amp;ditemid=685752" width="30" height="12" alt="comment count unavailable" style="vertical-align: middle;"/&gt; comments</content>
  </entry>
</feed>
