I'm not claiming you think that but rather than the project, you just want to talk about Dave Rubin, Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson and Stefan Molyneux and the biases common to classical liberals and us being associated with them. This happens so much, I tend to think its deflection
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @CathyYoung63 and
How about the fact that in most of the above I am responding to specific questions you asked! For instance, you specifically ask me to lay out the biases of classical liberals. I have explicitly distinguished you, James, and Peter and said from the start that people should...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @HPluckrose and
... consider the content of your critique and what you found. To make it even more explicit THEY SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT IDEOLOGICAL PANDERING = SCIENTIFIC MERIT in some fields. But acknowledging that does not mean it is deflecting to consider the biases/agenda of those ...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @HPluckrose and
... involved. Which include you, PB, and James and potentially your mystery funder. I accept your reasons for not disclosing funding btw but it is not a non-issue. Now, where in that did I say ignore all your findings because PB talked to Molyneux?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @CathyYoung63 and
You didn't say to. You just did it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
And this happens repeatedly. I raise the results of the project & people say "well we know some papers can be really bad but what about the time one of you talked to Rubin and Molyneux or when Peterson retweeted you and they're all connected to Sam Harris who spoke to Murray?
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CathyYoung63 and
I'm sure some people do make unjustified guilt by association dismissals of your entire project. That isn't what I am doing. I have not dismissed the project, nor have I dismissed you on the basis of your co-authors actions.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @CathyYoung63 and
OK but I'm not going to sit around waiting for you to stop talking about Rubin, Peterson & Harris as the context in which it shld be read even tho I ignore Rubin, find Peterson the biggest barrier to addressing the problem, admire Harris & none of them had anything to do with it
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CathyYoung63 and
Grand. I don't recall stating they had anything to do with the project. I also didn't say Molyneux did. I'm also not forcing you to go back and forth here. I'm mainly responding to you. Happy to agree to disagree.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @CathyYoung63 and
Well, they were part of what you called "a more in depth examination of the pros and cons and surrounding context of your efforts." I wouldn't judge your work in the context of a lot of what is coming out of cultural anthropology tho.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
You'll notice I'm engaging with you and what you say and not the worst examples of anthropology or anyone you might once have been in conference with who has said something certifiably insane.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @CathyYoung63 and
Ok, last response for me... 1. Cognitive not Cultural anthropology, important difference. 2. You shouldn't judge me on who I attended a conference with (no control), 3. You should factor in who I associate with & what I often talk about; especially if I am pally with ideologues.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.