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. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017

      I don't think it constitutes harassment to identify course content. And it could be used by students & parents who wanted pomo based studies as well as those who wanted to avoid them.

      10 replies 4 retweets 41 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Gil Ant‏ @Gil_Ant 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose

      there's a diff between cautionary warning & critique of poor epistemology & calling academics evil people with sinister motivations while foaming at the mouth, he's the wrong person to deliver this, & yes, it will lead to harassment. See some of his followers behavior on twitter.

      2 replies 2 retweets 17 likes
    3. Gil Ant‏ @Gil_Ant 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @Gil_Ant @HPluckrose

      ps: no problem with clear, objective statement of contents, like fire does for free speech codes. it's useful for students.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    4. Rootless [But Very Stable] Cosmopolitan‏ @BrianBuchbinder 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @Gil_Ant @HPluckrose

      Stupid. Please define POMO. What isn’t to naive rationalist taste I’m thinking.

      4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Rootless [But Very Stable] Cosmopolitan‏ @BrianBuchbinder 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant @HPluckrose

      It’s rationalist god-botherers like Jordan Peterson and Gad Saad who need the trigger warnings

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    6. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      JP is not a rationalist. He doesn't believe in objective truth.

      2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes
    7. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      That is incorrect. He believes in empirical fact as much as anyone while also believing there are truths that are not tangible this unable to be examined scientifically. In those snippets from his book, he's saying the scientific method provides facts without truth for being.

      3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @HPluckrose and

      Ex. eugenics. Scientifically eugenics is valid and empirically true; we breed things to our liking all the time and could with humans. Reason alone doesn't tell us we shouldn't engage in it. In this way he's saying our sense of how to be, that truth comes from elsewhere.

      3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      Everyone says that. It's not the point of contention.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      Yes it is. That is Peterson's take. He's said it an innumerable amount of times. You're building a straw man out of selective quotes.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      It's not the take anyone is disagreeing with tho. We disagree that 'truth' is defined by assistance in survival rather than what is objectively true whether we believe it or not, whether it helps or not.

      8:58 AM - 11 Nov 2017
      • 1 Like
      • Yenrap Rellin
      3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        1. New conversation
        2. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ThomasFriedman_ and

          Listen to the Harris and Rogan interview. Or find me one quote where he says something contrary to this. It's not a secret. He says it repeatedly. His admirers argue for it.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. 1 more reply
        1. New conversation
        2. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          I've seen more than those 5 interviews. He states all the time what he believes: there are empirical facts (science) and there are intangible truths associated with how to be (morality). An example in the Harris podcast is when he argued for truths in stories or literature.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          What do you perceive to be the difference between his understanding of truth and Sam Harris' then?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          Harris is strictly an empiricist to the point where he's entirely opposed to any sort of non-empirical conclusions as he associated them with theology. Peterson is a clinical psychologist. He lives in a world where empirical research mixes with human psychology to provide insight

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          On the subject of what is true.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        6. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          I'm not sure what's unclear. Harris is strictly empirical and rejects non-empirical notions of truth. Peterson is empirical while accepting that non-empirical notions of truth exist.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Rootless [But Very Stable] Cosmopolitan‏ @BrianBuchbinder 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @HPluckrose @Gil_Ant

          It seems the difference is sharper. Both accept that such "notions" exist. Harris denies they have any basis in reality, Peterson doesn't.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        8. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @BrianBuchbinder @HPluckrose @Gil_Ant

          That does not make sense. You can't accept non-empirical truth and then claim the concept has no basis in reality.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          eg Britons think 21% of Brits are Muslim. The empirical truth is that 5% are. The 21% narrative is not the reality. For Peterson, if overestimating by 400% aided our survival it would become true. For Harris it wouldn't.

          2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        10. 2 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ThomasFriedman_ and

          Yeah. That's what drove me crazy in his first Sam Harris interview. JP kept saying "It's true for the species if it helps the species survive." Nonesense.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        3. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @sisboombahbah @HPluckrose and

          That is not nonsense, that's Darwinian.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @HPluckrose and

          It's nonesense that lies become truth just cause some organism's survival depended on it. Lies can useful. Not truthful. By definition.

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        5. End of 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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

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