Falsifiability

In a recent conversation with metageek, I argued against his strong support for falsifiability, as I think that spirituality, in moderation, is a Good Thing.

Today, I read the letters column in the latest (and penultimate) issue of Cerebus. Puts me in more of a pro-falsifiability mood, I'll say. Dave Sim has built himself a totally non-falsifiable world view, wherein all things he disapproves of are attributable to Evile Feminists, and the few things in the world he does approve of are due to the efforts of the few remaining Real Men. All the way down to physics and cosmology.

Falsifiability

In a recent conversation with metageek, I argued against his strong support for falsifiability, as I think that spirituality, in moderation, is a Good Thing.

Today, I read the letters column in the latest (and penultimate) issue of Cerebus. Puts me in more of a pro-falsifiability mood, I'll say. Dave Sim has built himself a totally non-falsifiable world view, wherein all things he disapproves of are attributable to Evile Feminists, and the few things in the world he does approve of are due to the efforts of the few remaining Real Men. All the way down to physics and cosmology.

Meta-discussion about LJ

siderea recently tried to start a discussion (on the topic of "love"). I observe that, though she got many people replying, there was very little discussion, or back-and-forth. Such back-and-forth discussions do happen on LJ, so why didn't any happen this time? Does it have to do with the topic?

My suspicion in this case is that it was more the format of the initial post. She posted a long list of (interesting) questions. Soem people are obviously willing to answer a long list like that. But I suspect that few people are willing to follow up on other people's long list of answers.

Is it the case that, for involved discussion to happen, the initial "starter" post needs to be more tightly constrained?

Meta-discussion about LJ

siderea recently tried to start a discussion (on the topic of "love"). I observe that, though she got many people replying, there was very little discussion, or back-and-forth. Such back-and-forth discussions do happen on LJ, so why didn't any happen this time? Does it have to do with the topic?

My suspicion in this case is that it was more the format of the initial post. She posted a long list of (interesting) questions. Soem people are obviously willing to answer a long list like that. But I suspect that few people are willing to follow up on other people's long list of answers.

Is it the case that, for involved discussion to happen, the initial "starter" post needs to be more tightly constrained?