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. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15

      Nobody listens to me, but my opinion is the best way to test these things is to agree to a protocol with those who are making the claims. And agree beforehand whether a particular result would disprove the claims.

      4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
      Show this thread
    2. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15

      May be difficult, but otherwise, people are just going to argue forever over whether the study actually proved anything.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Show this thread
    3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @christianjbdev

      It showed that we could draw on an awful lot of terrible scholarship to justify terrible claims and that reviewers would direct this to further awfulness.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    4. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
      Replying to @HPluckrose

      I'm not doubting you're convinced by your own study.

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    5. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
      Replying to @christianjbdev @HPluckrose

      The point I'm making, and which you're responding to, is that a good way to convince others is to design an experimental protocol in collaboration with the ones making the claims, and where everyone agrees to abide by the results, beforehand.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    6. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @christianjbdev

      I'm quite sure it is.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
      Replying to @HPluckrose

      Good.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @christianjbdev

      However, I'm not sure how that would work here because if everyone agreed that its a problem that journals publish the things they do, they wouldn't be able to do that. They do it because people don't agree that this is a problem.

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

      And I'm not sure what an experimental protocol would look like when we relied on being directed by reviewers & learning how it worked as we went along. I'm certainly not asserting that this reflexive ethnographic kind of approach is the only or most convincing one

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

      We have tried to be clear about what can be claimed to have been shown and what can't and it mostly comes down to being able to get the kind of stuff published that we did get published by using existing scholarship to justify it and following reviewers' directions. That's all.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

      People cannot deny this to be true but they can argue about what it means. Those opposed seem to be mostly saying that 1) our papers are actually good & there is no problem, 2) Whataboutism about how other fields have problems too 3) Character & motivational assassinations.

      11:37 AM - 15 Oct 2018
      • 3 Likes
      • Erik Norvind Spooker Turner @SSC Beat Confusion
      3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose

          I think there were some people who weren't obviously ill-intentioned or stupid who were failed to be convinced by this study. Some people found it very convincing, Other people were more skeptical. Of course, there were also character-assassins.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @christianjbdev @HPluckrose

          Personally, I thought the hoax was very witty, and well done, and I'm predisposed to think most of this critical theory stuff is bollocks anyway. But, I also think that people are going to continue to argue over what if anything it proves.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        4. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
          Replying to @christianjbdev

          Yes, but they do seem to be arguing over things outside of what we claimed it showed. People are saying we did not prove this epistemology or ethics to be any kind of a problem and we didn't in that project. That was about showing it to exist. We have argued against it elsewhere.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

          They are saying we did not prove knowledge production to be worse in these fields than anywhere else but this project was not about that either & did not make that claim. We support people addressing other kinds of problems with knowledge production in other fields.

          2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        6. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose

          OK, but I still think that's an honest criticism, even if you feel you can adequately answer it, and have adequately answered it. The 'control' question is a natural one for people to ask.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
          Replying to @christianjbdev

          What is the criticism? That we should have focused on some kind of metastudy on problems with knowledge production across a wide range of fields instead of looking at a specific one? I'll be the first to say I don't have the expertise to do that. I couldn't test physics journals.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        8. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose

          It's still seems a fair criticism to make. In the sense of criticising the conclusions of a study, not in the sense of criticising you as a person.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @christianjbdev @HPluckrose

          And even if that criticism has perfectly reasonable answers, I would think critics negligent if they didn't at least ask the question.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        10. 14 more replies
        1. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

          4) Talk about the ethics of giving false names and claiming to have IRB approval and hoaxes generally. 5) Say other methods of investigating this would have been better.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo
        1. Erik Norvind‏ @ErikNorvind Oct 16
          Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

          90% of your critics have literally said your argument is invalid cause you did not criticize other completely unrelated things... Its surreal to watch.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo

      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