I think this post is decent, and I was surprised to see the karma so low. I think this is getting at a central generator of the best LW content, and a generator which is not often articulated. Previously I articulated this to myself as trust the truth to be interesting: if I notice myself wanting to write "the most interesting story" (in a nonfiction post) or getting defensive, I remind myself that the truth should be interesting (if I was asking an interesting question to begin with), and the truth should be defensible; I can "trust the truth to have my back" -- if it doesn't, then I should want to lose (the argument / the audience).

However, I kind of think you are wrong to caution against anticipating arguments. I think anticipating arguments is a great tool for getting closer to reality, because it helps you knock down your own bad beliefs.

Good writing illuminates surprising things about reality. It must therefore be grounded in reality.

It must therefore illuminate, as well .

There a kind of bad writing that only states concrete facts, and expects the reader to draw the "obvious" conclusion.

Why are you writing? If you are trying to change someone,'s mind, you need to present them with new facts, or new reactions,inferences ,etc from facts. If you just present them with facts they already know, without any novel interpretation,why would they change their minds?

Don't argue

Do argue: why would anyone want to read a recitation of facts with no overall point.?

Most people are right most of the time about most things

Perhaps about practical things. But given the great variety of religious, political, ethical, and philosophical.ideas, and how evenly distributed they are, it would be very hard to say that most people are right about abstract, impractical things.

Darth Vader debuted a super laser blowing up Alderaan to strike fear in the rebel alliance. That is fiction and used to mark how villaineous the galactic empire is.

In reality there has been essentially 1 deployment of weapons of mass destruction against civilian targets in order to strike fear for geopolitical reasons. The deployer has not suffered signficant reputational harm and has not made an apology.