There are a lot of logical fallacies in today's software development world. Good logic it seems is hard to come by. Here's two simple known-to-work logic principles
- Modus ponens - If A is true, then B is true. When A IS True, Therefore B is true.
- Modus tollens - If A is true, then B is true. But B is not true, so A is not true.
But there is a large collection of logical fallacies. A Theory says:
- If P, then Q
- Design an experiment to see what Q obtains
- That experiment works
- So P is true
But this simple-minded experiment is logically incorrect.
Q might be true for a variety of reasons having nothing to do with the experiment.
This lead Karl Popper to the principle of falsification. In Popper's approach, you can never prove a theory is true, without testing every conceivable condition in which the theory operates. A single counterexample proves the theory wrong.
This is the approach #NoEstimates, Cone of Uncertainty, No-Story Points, Story Counting advocates use,
See I have an example of your theory working, or not working, so my approach proves your approach wrong.
This is proof by anecdote which is a sample of one from an unknown population:
- I have an example of the Cone of Uncertainty NOT reducing, so the principle of the Cone of Uncertainty is false.
- I have a CEO that can run his business without making estimates, so the principle that estimates are needed in the presence of uncertainty is false.
We live in a world where logical fallacies are rampant. John Cook of George Mason University did a study on logical fallacies and distortions, including jumping to conclusions, cherry-picking data, raising impossible expectations, relying on fake experts, encouraging conspiracy theories, and questions of motivation. All of these are present in the #NoEstimates advocates' rejection of all criticism of their conjecture that decisions can be made in the presence of uncertainty without estimates of the consequences of those decisions.
But there is a meta-fallacy in the #Noestimates community. Sociologists call it implicatory denial which is the failure to integrate one’s knowledge of topic into their everyday life or transform it into action. This form of denial is found in climate deniers, human rights deniers, Covid-19 deniers, anti-vaxers, and of course NO Estimates advocates.
The logic goes like this:
- If P, then Q
- But I don't like Q
- Therefore P must be wrong
In the end, the fallacy of No Estimates is based on the simple principle that is the basis of any non-de-minimis business decision, meaning for a project, product development, or service; when showing up late, over budget, with missing features or capabilities no one cares. The consequences are de-minimis
There is NO principle of Managerial Finance, Probabilistic Decision-Making, or Microeconomics of Software or Product Development, where, in the presence of reducible and/or irreducible uncertainty that creates risk - a credible decision can be made, using scarce resources, while spending other people's money, without Estimating the outcomes of that decision and its impact on the probability of success of a project, product, or service.
Anyone claiming otherwise and anyone supporting those who claim otherwise are subject to implicatory denial to how business works for any non-de-minimis endeavor.
A harsher term for those in denial in our Federal Acquisition domain is - Willful Ignorance and with that, the action comes to the result of Doing Stupid Things on Purpose
