They're not a real problem to assessing the merits of these arguments. You know better than this nonsense.
-
-
Replying to @myhumangetsme @CathyYoung63 and
"I don’t think it’s an either/or thing. Judge a work on its own merits but consider the agenda/biases of the author. Even in empirical research the ideology people approach a question from very often defines the answer they receive." And 1 more time: Not saying to dismiss hoax.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @C_Kavanagh @CathyYoung63 and
And yet your only concern seems to be to consider the agenda/biases of author, even who they might dare to speak to. What are your actual criticisms of this work in its own merits?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @myhumangetsme @C_Kavanagh and
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @myhumangetsme and
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?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @C_Kavanagh and
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nathan_k @HPluckrose and
I feel like the entire conversation above was just a messy proxy for that disagreement
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nathan_k @myhumangetsme and
It was also a lot to do with mindreading and guilt by association.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @myhumangetsme and
"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
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Ah, I see!
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @myhumangetsme and
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 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nathan_k @HPluckrose and
It seems to me that people spend 90% of their time arguing about derivatives of these deeper disagreements, which is quite futile
0 replies 0 retweets 3 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.