I've been thinking a bit about why I'm so unimpressed by the arguments about how terrible "academic silencing" is, and I've got some thoughts 1/n
-
Show this thread
-
2/n You know the arguments I mean. They usually go something like "[x famous academic] is being horribly silenced/faced the modern inquisition!" And they usually come off as, well, nonsense
1 reply 4 retweets 90 likesShow this thread -
3/n Now, part of this is because the academic being defended usually has not by any description been silenced. Nobel laureates and tenured professors at Stanford don't really need defending they can do it themselves
1 reply 7 retweets 119 likesShow this thread -
4/n As a wise man said "it's basically impossible to silence a man who can call his own press conferences" (paraphrased)
2 replies 19 retweets 180 likesShow this thread -
-
Replying to @jamesheathers @GidMK
James Heathers Retweeted James Heathers
oooooooooooooooooooohttps://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1254973017287000065 …
James Heathers added,
James Heathers @jamesheathers* Screw-ups are not 'scientific misconduct' * It's very hard to 'silence' someone who can call a press conference * Almost no-one is ready to navigate the speed and seriousness of frontline scientific discourse right now * Some of you need a nap. Or a Paxil.Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.