Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/6973e373-2b8c-800d-84b7-d7001cfc6bac
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Assistant: Here’s the argument-map for GregLiotta’s comment, using only what you’ve provided so far the pinned post is treated as … === Here’s the argument-map for GregLiotta’s comment, using only what you’ve provided so far (the pinned post is treated as context, and no other comments/objections have been provided yet). ==== A1. “Seasoned licensed clinician here.” ==== * This functions as an appeal to authority / credibility claim (implying his evaluation should carry extra weight). A2. “The utter sensibility in this has its brilliance totally drowned beneath 10x too many words for a sub-reddit post.” * Core claim: the post is substantively good but overwritten to the point that the value is obscured. A3. “This is a NY TIMES Sunday edition article.” * Analogy claim: the post reads like a long-form, high-word-count editorial rather than a Reddit post. A4. “Reading on a smart phone is a NO.” * Usability claim: the length/density makes it impractical to read on a phone. A5. “I’ll say the first half of it is 100% spot on…” * Accuracy claim: at least the first half is fully correct (as judged by him). A6. “…and should be the standard model for understanding ‘AI Therapy.’” * Normative claim: the post’s first-half framing ought to be adopted as the default/standard conceptual model. ==== Because no other comments or counterarguments have been provided yet, none of Greg’s claims are presently being questioned by a separate standing objection. ==== ✅ Currently unquestioned (so far): A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6 ⚠️ Currently in question: (none yet) 🔥 Contested both ways: (none yet) ==== Just to make the mechanism explicit (so you can see what I’ll be tracking as the thread grows): ==== * If someone replies, “It’s not too long; Reddit can handle long posts,” that would challenge A2/A3/A4. * If someone replies, “The first half is wrong / misleading,” that would challenge A5. * If someone replies, “This shouldn’t be the standard model,” that would challenge A6. And if those objections themselves go unanswered, then A2–A6 would become currently in question. Send the next comment in the thread whenever you’re ready.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)