Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'Eulering' and strategies for dealing with complex mathematical arguments in non-mathematical debates. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of 'Eulering,' where complex mathematical arguments are used to refute non-mathematical ideas, potentially leaving those less mathematically inclined unable to respond effectively. He uses the apocryphal story of Diderot and Euler to illustrate this concept. Scott explores the dilemma of whether to dismiss such arguments as sophistry or to accept them at face value, highlighting the trade-off between avoiding mathematical intimidation and maintaining intellectual rigor. He discusses his personal experiences with mathematical arguments in various fields, particularly focusing on statistics in scientific research. Scott proposes a strategy of 'routing around' complex mathematical objections by focusing on the underlying non-mathematical claims and evidence. Shorter summary