You mean people projecting this problem onto them with zero evidence beyond their own preconceptions and an occasional stereotype they read online?

HN should be better than this.

Let's read the thread: "There has to be (or ought to be) a name for this kind of epistemological fallacy, where in pursuit of truth, the pursuit of logical sophistication and soundness between starting assumptions (or first principles) and conclusions becomes functionally way more important than carefully evaluating and thoughtfully choosing the right starting assumptions (and being willing to change them when they are found to be inconsistent with sound observation and interpretation)."

Can people suffer from that impairment? Is that possible? If not, please explain how wrong assumptions can be eliminated without actively looking for them. If the impairment is real, what would you call its victims? Pick your own terminology.

Name calling may be helpful in some contexts, but I doubt it's persuasive to the people in question.

I think a huge part of the subtext to this conversation is that nothing is persuasive to the people in question. How many people in this thread have come down off the mountain to explain a point of view that's just bouncing off some dude who's never needed to develop a feedback loop for his thinking?

Calling someone a dumbass in this situation is a kindness, because the assumption is that they're capable of not being one with a little self-reflection.

> Calling someone a dumbass in this situation is a kindness

First they laugh...

That may work for literature, but I was hoping for something more precise.