Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
80 72 88 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
70 62 78 -
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
Insufficient record: 2 promises resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 75 (likely 69 to 80, high confidence), from 79 claims: 35 factual claims, 44 predictions. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Scott Alexander's claims
35 claims
“This is true only insofar as I once expressed agreement with an unrelated position of Charles Murray’s”
Scott Alexander, blog author 14 February 2021 Statement on New York Times Article (Astral Codex Ten)
Scott Alexander said the NYT's characterisation was true only insofar as he once expressed agreement with an unrelated Charles Murray position: that telling poor people to learn to code is insufficient and a stable income is needed.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
The evidence is the person's or their organisation's own records.
What would count as true or false
True if Scott Alexander's writings before February 2021 show that his only notable expressed agreement with Charles Murray was on an unrelated topic, namely that a guaranteed or basic income is needed rather than just telling poor people to learn to code (Murray's UBI position). Mostly true if that agreement exists and other agreements were trivial or passing. Mixed if he had expressed agreement with Murray on a few other substantive points. Mostly false if he expressed agreement with Murray on several topics, including ones related to the NYT's characterisation (such as Murray's views on race or IQ), while the UBI agreement is real. False if the UBI agreement did not happen, or if he had clearly and repeatedly endorsed the views the NYT linked him to.
Evidence
- Three Great Articles On Poverty, And Why I Disagree With All Of Them Slate Star Codex (Scott Alexander's blog) · 23 May 2016 Own record
“His solution is a basic income guarantee, and I guess that’s mine too.”
- Three Great Articles On Poverty, And Why I Disagree With All Of Them Slate Star Codex (Scott Alexander's blog) · 23 May 2016 Own record
“But he shares my skepticism that the 55 year old Kentucky trucker can be taught to code, and I don’t think he’s too sanguine about the trucker’s kids either.”
- Sacred Principles As Exhaustible Resources Slate Star Codex (Scott Alexander's blog) · 11 April 2017 Own record
“If Charles Murray sincerely believes what he says, thinks it’s important, and thinks that saying it makes the world a better place, then he is exactly the sort of person whom free speech exists to defend.”
- Book Review: The Cult Of Smart Astral Codex Ten (Scott Alexander's blog) · 18 February 2021 Own record
“A while ago, I freaked out upon finding a study that seemed to show most expert scientists in the field agreed with Murray's thesis in 1987”
Reasoning
Alexander's own 2016 post records the agreement directly. He says Murray's basic income guarantee is his solution too (E1), and that Murray shares his doubt that a 55-year-old trucker can be taught to code (E2). The 2017 post (E3) defends Murray's right to free speech but does not endorse his views on race or IQ. E4 was published after the 2021-02-14 judge-as-of date, so it was not used. The evidence confirms the UBI agreement but cannot show there were no other agreements, so this is mostly true rather than true.
Cite this claim
Scott Alexander, “Scott Alexander said the NYT's characterisation was true only insofar as he once expressed agreement with an unrelated Charles Murray position: that telling poor people to learn to code is insufficient and a stable income is needed.” (said 14 February 2021). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_399e9fab9cfd, method 0.1.0+8bea457b. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_399e9fab9cfd
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Scott Alexander? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.