How I made $3,300 on a short niche philosophy book

I've noticed a trend that these success stories usually flow out of an already existing user base.

Does anyone have any success stories from someone with no social media presence?

I promoted the first product similarly, but I also experimented a bit with paid ads and I invested some time there, so I'd say about 20 hours total. That product made $97K in sales, $13K of which from paid ads ($6K spent on ads).

I’m glad that he brings this valued point to the discussion and I’m thankful someone so impartial brings this up during the very important “Agree with scientific consensus on climate change == agree with pedophillia” debate.

"a" relationship? It was an if/then relationship! That's hardly an amorphous undefined relationship! The if/then is the objectionable part! Man, sometimes abstract thinking gets really silly.

I think he does, he is not stupid. I guess he just wanted attention and tweets like that play well into his base, who might not have the same understanding.

I am unable to see the contradiction. If Greta was indeed guiding global policy (which she's not even remotely close to doing) there would exist very strong incentive to manipulate her and the aggregate potential harm would greatly exceed that of a single instance of child abuse.

It's indeed a total strawman on the face of it, but I think the actual point he's making is that forbidden thoughts exists and the replies on Twitter are a proof of that point imo.

Seriously, also @orf, why take this here? Clearly the impulse to reflexively argue about this is too big to handle for some. Go do this on twitter where you copied it from.

whoosh.

He agrees with you that maturity doesn't equal consent; in fact, he relies on that it doesn't, he is saying something about immaturity. He is saying "Greta Thunberg is immature, why would you listen to her talk about long term issues of international economics (externalities)? If you would listen to her seriously, you would also hold to [other obviously absurd proposition]s." Your reply to him reads to me like you're shaking him by the lapels to say "your obviously absurd proposition is obviously absurd!!!"

Why is it so hard for "woke", "critical thinking" "virtue signallers" to follow simple analogies and reductio ad absurdem? One key to following somebody's argument is to not change their wording, just engage with the words they used and make sure you stick with a meaning that is consistent with what was said.

edit: just wanted to add for clarity, you might think for whatever reason that he's wrong and we should listen to Greta Thunberg's message. That's fine, but you know what that is called? it's called "staying on topic". It's all he was talking about.

and you may also think he went about making his point in a foolish way. That's also ok, but you say that more authoritatively if you show you get the point he was making, see above.

In terms of general tips on writing this kind of thing, I just start with a big Google Doc and start writing sections about whatever's on my mind. If I'm thinking about a particular interview question, I write about it and leave it with some kind of a note to make it easy to find when I'm searching later. Once I've got a fair amount of content, then I start organizing and filling in the rest.