Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Guttermouth's avatar

Counterfactual statements are literally all I've ever received when I've argued about any covid policy (usually accompanied by a hyperbolic dig about "I suppose we should just do nothing and 'let people die'."

They're impossible to respond to. They cannot be argued. This doesn't make them correct. Just incompatible with debate, like arguing the existence of God.

Expand full comment
Dr. MaryAnne Shiozawa, D.C. 🌸's avatar

Thanks for writing this. It's what my geeky, science-y, data-driven mathematician husband uses when we debate about lockdowns and vaccines. My geeky Stanford-grad older brother also uses this argument. "It would have been a lot worse if we didn't..."

I'm not geeky, or science-y like that, plus I was never on the debate team (I suck at confrontation and arguments), so I don't really know what to say when this statement comes up. I think it's important to discuss this whole counterfactual issue because it's what so many people (on the other team) say. And without evidence for either, it's difficult to debate, and I can't just go with what I 'feel'. Geeks (especially my husband) don't talk about FEELINGS.

Expand full comment
10 more comments...

No posts