Yes. Too much of the "you've has conversations with someone who turned out to be a ideological loon."
But he didn't say that was his only concern so therefore its unjust to observe that it demonstrably has been for tweet after tweet after tweet.
-
-
Again though Helen, you joined in a conversation that was explicitly talking about the importance of considering context. Complaining that I would focus on that is a little myopic. Should I switch all my conversations to whatever you want to discuss when you appear?
-
I won't appear.
-
I think there is a fairly strong disagreement here about what conversation implies, which - as I've said to you before Chris - is something that seems completely undefined at a social level, and most people don't agree about.
-
I feel like the entire conversation above was just a messy proxy for that disagreement
-
It was also a lot to do with mindreading and guilt by association.
-
"guilt by association" is what I'm referring to, though Chris might not like that as a summary. People have different ideas about "internet adjacency" and what it implies. Which shouldn't be surprising, things are moving quickly
-
Ah, I see!
-
I think there are a number of counter intuitive little axioms at work that account for the various political sub divisions we see. Theism, Blank slatism, disagreement about free speech definition, clear implications of having a conversation, what the state is philosophically etc
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The criticisms of the project are laid out very nicely in the article by
@HdxAcademy that I linked to WAY back at the start of this thread. Here it is again: https://heterodoxacademy.org/academic-grievance-studies/ … On balance though I am in favour of the hoax and think it was worthwhile.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.