Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
HPluckrose's profile
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
Helen Pluckrose
@HPluckrose

Tweets

Helen Pluckrose

@HPluckrose

Editor @AreoMagazine Secular, liberal humanist. Mother. Doglover. Writing book about epistemology & ethics on the academic left Helen.pluckrose@areomagazine.com

London.
areomagazine.com/author/hpluckr…
Joined August 2011

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Iona Italia‏ @IonaItalia Oct 24

      I'd like to point out a factual error at the beginning of this week's @verybadwizards podcast. The presenters, esp. @tamler, stated that @HPluckrose & @ConceptualJames have never voiced any serious critiques of pomo-influenced fields, only hoaxes. (Thread)

      9 replies 10 retweets 41 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
      Replying to @IonaItalia @verybadwizards and

      Other errors: They said there were 21 papers. They tentatively said all the papers were in Helen's name (this was just bizarre imo). They said "most were rejected" without pointing out the project was ended early due to exposure before revisions. They just didn't read it imo.

      3 replies 1 retweet 9 likes
    3. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
      Replying to @Intrinsic29 @IonaItalia and

      I just listened again and @peez also explicitly claims that they're motivated to vocally disagree with some of the views that people in these fields have and he gives an example of "gender equality" implying that these authors are opposed to gender equality. That was insane.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    4. Very Bad Wizards‏ @verybadwizards Oct 24
      Replying to @Intrinsic29 @IonaItalia and

      Dude you are totally missing what I said. At least quote the whole thing or give a time stamp. I said they were motivated by substantive disagreements about issues in these fields (such as how those fields treat the concept of gender equality). Is that up for debate?

      2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
    5. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
      Replying to @verybadwizards @IonaItalia and

      18:34: "They're very motivated to vocally disagree with some of the views that people in these fields have. And those views themselves are substantive. The views about, say, gender equality. They might not be right, but they are views that you could argue about..."

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    6. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
      Replying to @Intrinsic29 @verybadwizards and

      Both Helen and James have passionately argued for gender equality in a number of places. Your quote here suggested they're opposed to it.

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    7. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
      Replying to @Intrinsic29 @verybadwizards and

      And it'd be one thing if this was just a misstatement since this is basically live, but it's mixed in with a bunch of unfair mind-reading about their supposedly smug, gleeful intentions to hurt people.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
      Replying to @Intrinsic29 @verybadwizards and

      It was generally uncharitable, yes, but we expected this. I think you are more upset about it than we are because you didn't expect it of VBW. And also know us and our motivations, obviously.

      4:18 PM - 24 Oct 2018
      • 5 Likes
      • Nylifer Keith Saniga Oliver Cash (((ɹoqǝɹʇs ɹ ɔ))) Kevin
      3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. David Pizarro‏ @peez Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          I think my disagreement just boils down to whether hoaxing is necessary, or if it is effective to hoax, and whether hoaxing is the form of criticism that I’d want to receive (i wouldn’t, but we talked to James about the value of mockery and we just have different views).

          2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
        3. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
          Replying to @peez @HPluckrose and

          One point that would have been nice to hear brought up in relation to this is that the authors do argue against these ideas in ways that don't involve hoaxes rather often. This project is supplementary to that. Meant to address some common responses to that argument.

          2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
        4. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
          Replying to @Intrinsic29 @peez and

          But I think an ethical position against insincere scholarship intended to be revealed with an argument that there's a problem with knowledge production in that field can be consistently & coherently held whether you consider this hoaxing or not. I'd disagree with it.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          Because I think it can show the problem from start to finish with the process in a way that other forms of criticism cannot. It can show the research sources - the key texts already in the field - the review process & how authors are directed, the publication process etc

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        6. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          Obviously other ethical problems arise in other fields. Someone asked us why we didn't go for a problem in medical publishing in relation to bad data enabling dead tracheas to be transplanted into patients endangering their lives.

          3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        7. David Pizarro‏ @peez Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          (Btw, I saw you asked about this earlier. When i referred to “controls” i simply meant trying the same exercise in another field, one you respect, and comparing the publication rates to see if they are less likely to accept these anthropological Trojans.)

          2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        8. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
          Replying to @peez @HPluckrose and

          I think this is a common red herring response to the project. The project isn't explicitly claiming or hypothesizing that other fields are better. Other fields have problems too and I don't think this project is making any comment on that.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
          Replying to @Intrinsic29 @peez and

          No, absolutely not. If you mean why not write bad papers for fields with other problems with knowledge production, I don't even know how you'd go about comparing them even if we had the expertise necessary to produce exemplary papers in other fields.

          3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        10. 5 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. David Pizarro‏ @peez Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          And I genuinely don’t think we were lobbing ad hominem attacks. If I was, I didn’t mean to, and I’m sorry it came across that way. I just was wondering why choose that particular strategy (Paul thought it had some value, and I think it might make things worse).

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 24
          Replying to @peez @Intrinsic29 and

          So that we could operate inside it and really see how it works.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. David Pizarro‏ @peez Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and

          Sure, but you don’t really need to write fake articles to do that. But anyway, just wanted to clarify the disagreement and engage a bit. I appreciate the discussion, Helen.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. End of conversation
        1. Kevin‏ @Intrinsic29 Oct 24
          Replying to @HPluckrose @verybadwizards and

          Probably true.

          0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info