Re:A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
by kelseyfrog on Friday June 24, 2022 @12:19PM
(#31864785)
This is a really good example of how devil's advocate strategies don't actually add to furthering or strengthening a discussion. Categorically they add friction to the conversation without providing a benefit. Arguments from DA-proponents only provides more evidence of this position.
Devils advocate strategies have nothing to do with the post you are responding to. That was just contrary assertions- which is just bad argumentation.
Re:A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
by kelseyfrog on Friday June 24, 2022 @02:47PM
(#31867536)
> I'm playing devil's advocate
Maybe you saw another post?
I saw it. He's not actually playing devil's advocate, just using the name. It's like the People's Democratic Republic of Korea.
Re:A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
by kelseyfrog on Friday June 24, 2022 @04:43PM
(#31869045)
If you come across a devil's advocate let me know. I've only seen the People's Democratic Republic of Devil's Advocation and the I Actually Believe This But I'm Too Afraid To Say It types.
Re:A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
by imtringued on Friday June 24, 2022 @06:01PM
(#31870005)
We routinely abandon that strategy because it is highly inefficient.
Re:A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
by twobitshifter on Friday June 24, 2022 @01:20PM
(#31866034)
collectively societies decide and create laws to that effect. Some societies have laws that include decapitation, severing limbs, and stoning. Others see this behavior as inhumane.
I'm playing devil's advocate, but indeed there are those who agree with that statement. Who gets to decide which is right?