Comment on Why do neurotypicals like AI slop?
BarHocker@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks agoYour logic is flawed.
You have 2 samples of people with ADHD. And because of that you make the assumptions that all other people with ADHD react exactly the same. And all other neurodivergents, also those with something completely unrelated to ADHD, also react like that.
And then you also conclude that everyone without ADHD would react the complete opposite. As if there is 0 nuance to people without neurodivergence.
That is a lot of assumptions based on basically nothing.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
It’s an observation, not a conclusion ya nitwit.
The absence of scientifically rigorous, high sample size experimentally proven, well substantiated, documented reproducible conclusions does not render the observation wrong in and of itself because they’re just not in the same category.
Observation is the first step to formulating a theory, which leads to a hypothesis, which can be experimentally tested.
howrar@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
That would be valid if it was what you did. Except you didn’t. You assumed the hypothesis to be true and asked us why it’s true. You should instead be asking whether or not it’s true.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
And you reckon asking why something is true isn’t the same as asking if something is true?
howrar@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
It is not the same thing. When you ask why X is true, you’re not only asking the question. You’re also making the claim that X is true. Since the premise of the question is wrong, you’re making everyone do extra work to figure out why your question isn’t making sense to them and what question you actually need to have answered.
You can invite speculation without making false claims. You also haven’t contributed anything other than anecdotes despite having made that false claim.
jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Also you: “If everyone was as stupid as me, we never would have formed civilization.”