rjyoungling

I appreciate you for taking the time to not only have a look but also leave a comment. I'll continue to work on it and try to improve them. (Although, technology is moving so fast, I wouldn't be surprised if this issue resolves itself in a few months.)

Hope you're having a good day.

RJ

If this was obvious advice, the mistake wouldn't be so prevalent in among non-fiction authors.

>I suspect people who read a memoir, an auto-biography, an eulogy or about true crime may well be interested in reading about a topic rather than looking for actionable advice?

Those don't classify as the type of non-fiction problem solving books we're talking about.

All models and methods are an approximation of the world (excluding pure mathematics). That error in approximation creates problems when you don't respect the domain of validity of the theory.

Right now, what you claim as over-generalising, I argue is you taking our theory outside its domain of validity.

I agree that it breaks there, but that's only because it wasn't designed for that domain so it's kind of a strawman argument.