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.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and
And I’m totally fine disagreeing with you on that! (I suspect you are fine too). I just wanted to go on record to clarify what the disagreement is about. (But hey, i also think lots of practical jokes border on unethical). The harder q to answer is whether they’re effective.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @peez @Intrinsic29 and
Consistently? Do you think it is ever OK to go undercover to examine a system from within it and reveal a specific problem? I think we all draw a line somewhere. I wouldn't risk bad medical advice getting published. You'd prob be OK with revealing bad medical care?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and
Sure, of course. But we’re just disagreeing about how to “reveal”, I think?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @peez @Intrinsic29 and
Yes, but are we? Do you disagree that it is ever OK to misrepresent your identity and write papers that you don't believe to be good scholarship in order to show a problem in a field and how it works from start to finish?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @peez and
Or do you disagree that it was OK to do this to fields looking at race, gender and sexuality with a view to advancing social justice? Because you are sympathetic to the causes? That is most people's view & I get it. We have a bit about that in the Areo piece too.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and
Just browsing some of the real articles is painful. But I see you believe your methods are truly revealing something new, that others would never had seen (this is where Paul was in some agreement w you). I just think it galvanizes those who already agree, but changes no minds.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @peez @HPluckrose and
I mean they objectively reveal how the entire process of getting a paper published works. That can't be denied. It may not sway many or any people are committed but I see no reason to think it wouldn't sway fence sitters or people relatively new to the problem.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @peez and
I think we already see some benefits where more people are openly saying they already knew there were a load of problems and distancing themselves from it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @peez and
Yeah a lot of the utility I've seen already is in people close to the fields publicly announcing "everyone already knew there was a bunch of bullshit in these fields!" That by itself is great for people who didn't already know that to see imo.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Yes! I see a shift. Much defensiveness coming out in different ways but much of it is about addressing the problem. Even Mother Jones came out in favour and Buzzfeed was balanced. If we have made this just a little more untenable and worthy of embarrassment it was worthwhile.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29 and
Also, some productive conversations have happened with sincere right-wingers along the lines of "OK, you're admitting to problems on your side. We can also say we have some loons making false claims and being unethical." I'm intrigued to see where that will go.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. 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.