▲ | mallowdram 2 days ago | |||||||
Science isn't simply empirical. There are five other stages to theoretic knowledge and your reasoning suggests you don't know how to discuss ideas scientifically. You exclude statements to make claims. I said, attention erosion AND test score decline. You chose to make a narrative claim using No Child Left Behind, and picking one of the conditions. Yes there is a basic science of creativity (there is also a complex), we have indexes of creative erosion in the mid-20s. When you can revisit these ideas with a scientific manner, then I can respond. Until then you are just spinning narratives. | ||||||||
▲ | bccdee 2 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> When you can revisit these ideas with a scientific manner, then I can respond. Ironic that you would level a criticism like this while touting "non-empirical science," whatever that is. > You chose to make a narrative claim using No Child Left Behind Do me the courtesy of paraphrasing my claims accurately. I said the drop in test scores you're attributing to phones could more plausibly be caused by NCLB, which is a carefully couched statement that doesn't actually draw any concrete conclusions. I'm gesturing broadly at the absence of conclusive evidence, and you're telling me you don't need conclusive evidence to make definitive statements. I'm hardly the one spinning narratives here. | ||||||||
|