I just accidentally quote tweeted a person I was having a disagreement with saying 'don't be this person' when I meant to quote tweet myself saying this: https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/685624693093699585?s=19 … Have apologised and deleted. I did not mean to single him out as a person not to be!
-
-
I mean....you've studied history. You must know this is a common human trait.
-
But why? What is the pleasure in it? It doesn't make other people think you are clever. It just makes them think you are an irritating bore.
-
Multiple reasons: - simply misunderstanding (don't overestimate ppl) - drawing conclusions based on previous experiences - disliking the misinterpreted person - Some ppl do think it's clever. There are quite a few popular ppl thriving on this activity.
-
Your last two points combine. The reason some people think it's clever is they think they're uncovering villains' Freudian slips.
-
They can all combine, yes. But they needn't. Many people are perfectly fine with being clever about ppl they have no personal opinion on.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Defended SokalSq by pointing out I would have rejected those papers, not ‘revise’ with lots of helpful advice. Get called a ‘mean Reviewer 2’ who enjoys rejecting papers out of hand, hurting grad students by not helping teach them to write papers...
-
How dare you not coach authors on how to word their bullshit correctly to get it past the gate-keepers of virtue?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
In some cases, I suspect it is little more than trolling. They want to annoy you and that is the only reason they need for doing it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
My 12 year old does this, I call it the "what ifs" where he feels the need to negotiate for every possible scenario. It's frustrating, and exhausting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The sad thing is, I’ve noticed it’s often academics doing it - who ought to know better.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If you're arguing to win you can easily fake a win by going for a gotcha moment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just not so clever people who think they're finding ways to be clever.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've never understood the mentality of them, but I sure as hell recognise the type.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It can be a fine line though, since many sharp minds seek to rigorously test all putative solutions. Best to take a generous mindset but still be the gentle drill exposing lacunae.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think for some it's a mindset they get into where they interpret things in an almost robotic way. If they are used to doing work where extreme precision is important, particularly if it involves dissecting language, they may accidentally carry it over into other areas.
-
Sometimes when one is incredibly focused, trying to take the maximum amount of meaning from something, one actually loses sight of the context in search of deeper meaning hidden within the words. I'll admit this has happened to me before.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Haha. Me neither. Which is pretty much why I became a historian.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's an easy win. Find a chink in the armour and feel as if you've disproven the entire argument.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So your saying coffee is better than tea?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
In my experience this is most common among academics. They think the only legitimate type of thinking is WEIRD rationalism. Consilience is not a thing with them. They say “show me the evidence.” You list several books, each of which is chock full of notes, references, .......
-
...links to studies and other research. They say “That’s not evidence. Show me the peer reviewed paper about a controlled experiment that makes precisely the point you’re asserting. It’s pedantry squared. And they think they’re making an argument, or a point. They’re not.
-
Here are three articles on this very topic. 1)https://quillette.com/2018/04/08/academias-consilience-crisis/ …
New 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.