From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: devil's advocate Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:38:20 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87tufmjyai.fsf@gnus.org> <87lf0nr2b4.fsf@gnus.org> <87czlzjfhs.fsf@logand.com> <87pmpznmw4.fsf@gnus.org> <87a6h3jcfm.fsf@logand.com> <83lf0nj9w4.fsf@gnu.org> <8735mvj5u0.fsf@logand.com> <83a6gycs56.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21007"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, tom@logand.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 19 21:40:04 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2yS-0005GE-Cf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 21:40:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50706 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2yQ-0002R6-Ui for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:40:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38034) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2ws-0001kb-EW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:38:26 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=44976 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2wr-0004ev-FJ; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:38:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=Date:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: mime-version; bh=r80+lc0GXTjKlLwB18xpNOJBH23wN/62jtLGChH6FSY=; b=mmyz0gMLeEIu 34SPfVkf/rwOI/3vCwpYNgTXpv0bzfqthhgqqb3vqZzDt8kOnPvGL9MkZKx3ShlzjNJUn170NLPM1 mldOXrwlKAiQtIekQSAX8XEyqH3JgrpwvzSk1qCJVXJ1inV2fFelLoKgEaNyA99O2KU/WA9lv786O LoRriSWmoHL7yIShrU4jYq2hRUoECmfyPqElX90do6WLgK1QMVk5VZk7rnA1NMcNRrjN3y2/0gDoH qTmqu2JRXxkS3n5XQfKSM6m5E+7WQJxLRbqZwRw6eZ0qa2Q6cEy5QNm1bDETzKI/xbFa34NomAePm 9gP5+m4/W1wtImrW+Oe8Bg==; Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2wm-00042F-5w; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:38:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83a6gycs56.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:02:29 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:282467 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I wish I had changed the subject line before, but better late than never. > I disagree with Richard on this point, and I disagree with that essay. > IME, hearing devil's advocates is very important for cleansing my > ideas and thoughts, and for making good balanced decisions. I think we are talking about two different practices. As I explain in the article, people who are "playing devil's advocate" are not trying to help you make a good decision; they are imitating someone who is trying to fight you, to see what you would do under attack. They don't look for valid arguments; rather, they will say what they they imagine your worst enemies would say. That typically includes fallacies, mistaken assumptions, and distorted goals -- because your worst enemies would surely use those. You're talking about people who sincerely want to help, and argue for a different course of action using valid arguments, based on our real goals. That's not playing devil's advocate, they are honestly disagreeing. To find such arguments, they need to start with a sincere helpful attitude. When people do that, they can be very helpful. That's totally different from playing devil's advocate. > in many rational organizations, the decision-making process requires > the participation of the so-called "red team", which plays the role of > an adversary ("devil") with the purpose of making the decisions sound > and sustainable. I have never seen this in use. Is the "red team" charged to look only for valid and pertinent arguments for changing the plan? Or is it supposed to treat the question as a real fight, trying to defeat the plan by hook or by crook, and cheer if the plan is stopped? -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)