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. 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
    2. (((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
    3. (((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
    4. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 15
      Replying to @christianjbdev

      It's generally known as whattaboutism and is an attempt to deflect. Why are you addressing this instead of that? Why criticise Islam and not also Christianity? Why criticise subsections of the humanities instead of science? Why look at where women are disadvantaged & not men?

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

      Again, it depends on the claim. If you are specifically making the claim that X is worse than Y, then yes, you do need to look at both X and Y.

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

      You can of course take the position that *any* exposure of bad peer-review is worth doing, but if you are specifically making the claim that the standards of peer review in field X is worse than that in other fields, then it's natural for people to ask whether you've tested both.

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

      If we had specifically made that claim, of course it would be valid to criticise us if we had not supported it. As we actually made no such claim but specified what we were looking at and why - because we are liberals who care about epistemology & consistent ethics - it is not

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

      OK, so you're not claiming that the standards of peer review in 'grievance studies' is any worse than that in physics say. I stand corrected.

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

      I have no idea whether it is or not or even whether they could be compared because dishonest or erroneous peer review in a field which upholds an evidence-based epistemology would look totally different to explicit rejection of an evidence-based epistemology.

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

      I can see that if a subfield is essentially printing fairy stories, then it's hard to compare its peer review to that of physics.

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

      Peer-review systems are almost beside the point.

      12:55 PM - 15 Oct 2018
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. (((Christian JB)))  🐌‏ @christianjbdev Oct 15
          Replying to @HPluckrose

          You have to forgive me for being confused then, by what you're trying to prove!

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

          I *thought* this was a test of peer-review in these journals, but am I now to understand that their peer-review standards are beside the point?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Erik Norvind‏ @ErikNorvind Oct 16
          Replying to @christianjbdev @HPluckrose

          @christianjbdev This was clearly a test to see if one could pass off complete rubbish as legitimate research and findings within the humanities if one flattered certain ideologies and political angles. It succeeded. Does that clear it up?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 16
          Replying to @ErikNorvind @christianjbdev

          Hey! Don't yell at him. Sincere questioner and friend. (Only I get to yell at him)

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        6. Erik Norvind‏ @ErikNorvind Oct 16
          Replying to @HPluckrose @christianjbdev

          Its just hard to tell who is being sincere and who is not at this point. : (

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 16
          Replying to @ErikNorvind @christianjbdev

          Sadly, true.

          0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        8. 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