Dface's Discussion of "Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors"

[Dface]

I’m gonna write about the second sentence of the following paragraph:

Paragraph about how to apply criticism to multiple goals

@Elliot

When you actually act, you’ll have multiple goals – or, equivalently, a combined goal with “and” in it multiples times. But you can think of criticism as best focused on sub-goals or minimally-sized goals. Criticism should only be aimed at a group of three things if it actually means that you won’t be able to succeed at all three together. Most criticism says an idea/plan/action fails at a specific thing, so it should be aimed at that one thing, not at a broader group. Many criticisms say that an idea/plan/action will fail at multiple specific things, in which case you can have a list of goals that the criticism applies to.

The sentence:

@Elliot

But you can think of criticism as best focused on sub-goals or minimally-sized goals.

What is the “But” there for? I think it’s to contrast two things. It’s for contrasting between maybe focusing criticism on sub-goals vs. big goals?

Does having multiple goals equal having sub-goals or having minimally-sized goals? How many goals is multiple? 3? More?

I think sub-goals is equal to dividing big goals into separate pieces.

Third sentence:

@Elliot

Criticism should only be aimed at a group of three things if it actually means that you won’t be able to succeed at all three together.

I think the sentence above is an exception in a way to using criticism on the group of three goals.

I see that now we’re saying that the goals are in a group. So does that mean a group of goals = a combined goal with “and” in it a lot of times = a big goal?.. Oh wait, I see that the group is actually made of three things not goals. I don’t know why I thought it said goals

Could “things” mean ideas/action/plan?

“all three together.” Sounds like combined goals with “and” in it multiple times. It also sounds like a goal like ‘do x and y and z’.

I see if you succeed at the first and second thing together then maybe it wouldn’t make sense to criticize doing all three together. My question is why is your criticism grouping all three things together?

What if you can do the all three things individually does that necessarily mean you can already do them together? Is that what criticizing a group is for?

What if you don’t know about succeeding at any of the three things? Can you criticize all three together there? Do you gotta find like a common pattern? You can talk about three things as a whole and why it fails at a goal?