Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
HPluckrose's profile
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
@HPluckrose

Tweets

Helen Pluckrose

@HPluckrose

Editor @AreoMagazine Secular, liberal humanist. Mother. Doglover. Writing book about epistemology & ethics on the academic left Helen.pluckrose@areomagazine.com

London.
areomagazine.com/author/hpluckr…
Joined August 2011

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Will Wilkinson  🌐‏Verified account @willwilkinson Oct 10
      Replying to @willwilkinson @HPluckrose and

      But you haven't. As far as I can tell, you haven't even approached them in any serious way. The basis for your claims against "grievance studies" applies to a huge range of serious, maximally rigorous philosophical opinion.

      2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes
    2. Will Wilkinson  🌐‏Verified account @willwilkinson Oct 10
      Replying to @willwilkinson @HPluckrose and

      Unless you press press your claims from a narrower, better defended set of assumptions, people who actually do have high intellectual standards have little reason to take any of this seriously.

      4 replies 0 retweets 10 likes
    3. Chris Schumerth‏ @ChrisSchumerth Oct 10
      Replying to @willwilkinson @HPluckrose and

      You really don't find it disturbing that it is possible to, basically, make stuff up and get your work published in 7 journals in a year by simply imitating a style and a set of ideological buzzwords? You still think that process has integrity?

      4 replies 3 retweets 59 likes
    4. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
      Replying to @ChrisSchumerth @willwilkinson and

      I think you're missing the point. Nearly any field is vulnerable If you take 3 people with some experience in publishing and give them a year to try to hack at academic journals and consider any success rate higher than 0 to prove rot at the ideological core.

      5 replies 1 retweet 8 likes
    5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
      Replying to @Dan_Carrigg @ChrisSchumerth and

      Other fields have knowledge production problems, yes. The key is finding out what the problem is. In this case, it is a very specific ideology rooted in postmodernism that we wanted to show & we did. If you don't see a problem with the papers we wrote, the ones we cited & reviews

      3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
    6. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
      Replying to @HPluckrose @Dan_Carrigg and

      I don't know what to say to you. It doesn't really help to say there are other kinds of problems in other fields too. That just means they should all be addressed.

      2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
    7. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
      Replying to @HPluckrose @ChrisSchumerth and

      It's not a "problem in another field." It's that peer review as a system is vulnerable to the sort of attacks you used. You proved that peer review is vulnerable to malicious agents seeking to abuse it. Kudos. But I don't think you proved more than that.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    8. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
      Replying to @Dan_Carrigg @ChrisSchumerth and

      What do you mean? We targetted a very specific epistemology and ethical structure that isn't found in other fields & showed it to exist in this one. We couldn't publish an argument that using dildos make men less transphobic in a physics journal. The precedent isn't there

      4 replies 0 retweets 13 likes
    9. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
      Replying to @HPluckrose @ChrisSchumerth and

      But you could make up experimental results like you did here. Or make up theory like you did here. You telling me honestly you don't think you could use this same general hack to get a string theory or m-brane paper published in physics theory?

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    10. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
      Replying to @Dan_Carrigg @ChrisSchumerth and

      Its not general. It is very specific. I don't know if there is a problem that can be exploited in physics. The bad epistemology would need to already be present in the body of work for it to work & I can't speculate on what that would be. I know little about physics.

      3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
      Replying to @HPluckrose @Dan_Carrigg and

      Here's something that might be clearer. Suppose bad scholarship were being done on the dangers of fat to support sugar companies. This has been suggested. Hoaxers could test this by drawing on existing scholarship to write bad papers that would make the problem clearer.

      10:26 AM - 10 Oct 2018
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Dan_Carrigg and

          Along the way, they could show that they got lots of direction from reviewers to say more about how fat is bad and sugar is good.This would then show a problem in knowledge production in that field. It is a different problem to the one in identity studies.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Dan_Carrigg and

          Essentially, a problem needs to exist for this kind of exploration to be able to draw on the scholarly canon to make their cases. This problem won't be same in every field but there can certainly be many fields which have problems.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        4. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ChrisSchumerth and

          Maybe. I'm not sure. I am pretty sure this method would never prove such a problem exists in any field, though. Anyone can do enough background to set up some decent cites and review, then lie about results or sneak in some glaring method flaw under a fake name.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
          Replying to @Dan_Carrigg @ChrisSchumerth and

          I think you need to read our papers and see what you are suggesting could have been plausible scholarship.

          3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        6. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ChrisSchumerth and

          I mean, you really think it'd be more difficult to say you blew hundreds of grand running a particle accelerator to get this data and try to get it into some obscure particle physics journal?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 10
          Replying to @Dan_Carrigg @ChrisSchumerth and

          I have already explained very clearly why this isn't related to the point or purpose of the project a few times now so I will leave it here.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        8. Dan Carrigg‏ @Dan_Carrigg Oct 10
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ChrisSchumerth and

          And I've already explained that your methods are unrelated to proving the point or purpose of your project.

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        9. End of conversation

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info