> I am doubting that it is a provable fact that it works for only a minuscule fraction of people
Nothing they wrote implied minuscule.
> You are effectively implying that firsthand experience and expertise are completely worthless
Individual experience is nearly worthless when making claims about populations. Individual experience and biased sampling do not make an expert.
> and people can only learn information from large scientific studies
Nothing they wrote implied this.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that your comment isn't really about what I am actually saying, but a general anger towards anything that looks like "pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps"
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.[1]
> an anger you can see in other comments in this thread as well.
We read different comments seemingly. Or you inferred anger where it was not evident.
> I don't agree that using techniques that can help people overcome adversity in any way diminishes the challenges people face, or diminishes things like systematic injustice and addiction that certainly can be due to factors outside of one's control, and hard or impossible to overcome.
This misrepresented what you said and what others said.
You claimed it worked for a huge fraction of
> I am doubting that it is a provable fact that it works for only a minuscule fraction of people
Nothing they wrote implied minuscule.
> You are effectively implying that firsthand experience and expertise are completely worthless
Individual experience is nearly worthless when making claims about populations. Individual experience and biased sampling do not make an expert.
> and people can only learn information from large scientific studies
Nothing they wrote implied this.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that your comment isn't really about what I am actually saying, but a general anger towards anything that looks like "pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps"
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.[1]
> an anger you can see in other comments in this thread as well.
We read different comments seemingly. Or you inferred anger where it was not evident.
> I don't agree that using techniques that can help people overcome adversity in any way diminishes the challenges people face, or diminishes things like systematic injustice and addiction that certainly can be due to factors outside of one's control, and hard or impossible to overcome.
This misrepresented what you said and what others said.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html