Exact(7)
Stephenson called this view "naive".
Mr. Lévy called this view nonsense, saying that the goal was to generate debate rather than to push the French agenda.
Balaguer called this view "full-blooded Platonism," and he argued that it is only by endorsing this view that Platonists can explain how humans could acquire knowledge of abstract objects.
Quentin Skinner has called this view of freedom 'neo-Roman', invoking ideas about freedom both of the ancient Romans and of a number of Renaissance and early modern writers.
In 1994 Andrew Porter called this view preposterous.
O'Reilly called this view "flat-out reprehensible".
Similar(52)
You could hardly even call this view simplified.
Several of my makeshift opinion panel went so far as to call this view ageist.
Call this view misidentificationism.
Call this view of trustworthiness "the social contract view".
Call this view the "minimal counter-evidence requirement".
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com