Applies to discussion about AGI. Far too easy to get caught up in quibbles over words, or to reach seemingly irrefutable conclusions based on implicit assumptions.
To make conceptual progress on how AGI might look, I try reason from the delta of what we know now vs in 2012.
When a debate descends to talking about the meanings of words, it's irrecoverable. You will learn nothing from continuing. I'm not sure why this is true, but empirically I've found to be true 100% of the time.