Sloppy evidence is far more damaging than no evidence. The fact that this author even brings up Gladwell caused me to stop reading. In light of Greenspun's argument that domestic pilots have orders of magnitude more experience, Gladwell's argument is worthless at best. But clearly, Gladwell's argument is worse than worthless, because now people are using it as anecdotal evidence in other realms. Even worse, the OP picked this anecdote because it is the same as his own hypothesis.
Yes, agreed. Gladwell is sloppy, it's just that Greenspun's essay was not where I discovered this fact. As far as Gladwell debunkings go, the philg attempt was the least convincing.
Comments
Gladwell is sloppy, but to be fair, in that essay, it seemed like Greenspun was out to avenge Pinker (MIT). It was more attack than criticism.
Sloppy evidence is far more damaging than no evidence. The fact that this author even brings up Gladwell caused me to stop reading. In light of Greenspun's argument that domestic pilots have orders of magnitude more experience, Gladwell's argument is worthless at best. But clearly, Gladwell's argument is worse than worthless, because now people are using it as anecdotal evidence in other realms. Even worse, the OP picked this anecdote because it is the same as his own hypothesis.
Yes, agreed. Gladwell is sloppy, it's just that Greenspun's essay was not where I discovered this fact. As far as Gladwell debunkings go, the philg attempt was the least convincing.