If anyone says that, it shows they haven't read the Areo write-up where we say very clearly that we're advocating not only for evidence-based epistemology but also consistently liberal ethics. We've said it pretty much everywhere else too. We've been writing about this for years.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @ArthurCDent and
You don’t think I could have read the Areo piece and arrived from a different view than what you explicitly tell me to think? Wow I guess I’m reading articles wrong. I usually don’t accept on faith the authors framing. I would refer you to the article by
@Musa_alGharbi for...2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @HPluckrose and
... a more in depth examination of the pros and cons and surrounding context of your efforts. I don’t deny you the right to explain your motivation but that doesn’t mean I have to uncritically swallow it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @ArthurCDent and
Ah! You've moved on from disagreeing with people who say we don't have an agenda to disagreeing with us about what we say ours is? Well, I can't do much about that. It never helps to argue with mindreaders. We are the only authority on our own motivations.
3 replies 1 retweet 19 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
Apologies. I took you for someone pointing out a fact to people who have missed it. I had no idea you were hostile & would respond with indignant snark & mindreading or I'd not have attempted talking to you. I'll leave you to condemn the version of us you have invented.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
I'm sorry Helen. I know it gets exhausting when you are such an honest, transparent and open scholar and writer.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @C_Kavanagh and
I try to be! I don't mind if people think I'm evil for what I actually think. But it seems that Chris and I were at cross-purposes anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
He's very polite but he won't agree that he can know biases and agendas through probabilities and that particularly Boghossian is anti science, so we had to leave it there.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @HPluckrose and
Just for the record that’s not what I’ve said. I haven’t said Boghossian is anti science and I’ve only said it is possible to identify biases and ideological agendas through applying normal skepticism/critical thinking. Ignoring all context isn’t being pure and objective.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @HPluckrose and
Skeptic Review Retweeted Chris Kavanagh
It was a paraphrase. Sorryhttps://twitter.com/C_Kavanagh/status/1054524963695128577 …
Skeptic Review added,
Chris Kavanagh @C_KavanaghReplying to @ArthurCDent @SkepticReview89 @CathyYoung63Sure and they had success but people should recognise the event for what it is- advocacy. To say it is non-political and non-ideological is naïve. Boghossian might say he is just pro-science/critical thinking but his actions suggest otherwise or at least broader motives.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
That's a mistake if Chris thought Peter denied having any political, ideological motivations. We all wrote the Areo piece where we set them out. And we've done a few talks on it.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
But Chris doubts the stated motivations. That's where we get crosswise. I even asked what reliable epistemology would there be for him to determine your true motivations?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @C_Kavanagh and
Lots of liberal lefties do. We wrote that in Areo piece. They feel that to criticise scholarship into social justice issues for women & minorities is to be against social justice for them. Our job is to persuade them this works better on rigorous epistemology & consistent ethics
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
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.