I'm not appealing to the authority of a neuroscientist, I am flagging up the original 'appeal to authority' as a cynical tactic, and flagging up my own 'authority' as a counterpoint if anyone puts stock in such methods.
I'm appealing to the actual scientific evidence, of which there is a huge body and which represents samples that are for more indicative of the whole population than a handful of clinical cases in a single practice, which will by definition represent the absolute worst-case scenarios.
I am not promoting a 'pro phone' book, I'm promoting an evidence-based book, that is both for and against phones, depending on the context. My primary concern here is correcting bad science/misinformation in the mainstream, because that worsens everything for us all in the long run. If I can sell books as an aside, then my family gets to eat and we can keep our house.
I defer to published studies and sources for all my conclusions. If the studies and sources update and say something different, I'll change my conclusions.
I do not concoct spurious arguments from anecdotal evidence, vibes, and agenda-driven TV shows and present them for a mass audience in a major publication.
Nobody is 100% objective, because that's not how humans work. But tenuous 'whataboutism' is a diversionary tactic, not the gotcha you seem to think it is.
I'm not appealing to the authority of a neuroscientist, I am flagging up the original 'appeal to authority' as a cynical tactic, and flagging up my own 'authority' as a counterpoint if anyone puts stock in such methods.
I'm appealing to the actual scientific evidence, of which there is a huge body and which represents samples that are for more indicative of the whole population than a handful of clinical cases in a single practice, which will by definition represent the absolute worst-case scenarios.
I am not promoting a 'pro phone' book, I'm promoting an evidence-based book, that is both for and against phones, depending on the context. My primary concern here is correcting bad science/misinformation in the mainstream, because that worsens everything for us all in the long run. If I can sell books as an aside, then my family gets to eat and we can keep our house.
I defer to published studies and sources for all my conclusions. If the studies and sources update and say something different, I'll change my conclusions.
I do not concoct spurious arguments from anecdotal evidence, vibes, and agenda-driven TV shows and present them for a mass audience in a major publication.
Nobody is 100% objective, because that's not how humans work. But tenuous 'whataboutism' is a diversionary tactic, not the gotcha you seem to think it is.
"Yet you participate in society..."