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. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      He does not DENY objective fact. That immediately makes him NOT a postmodernist. He accepts science wholeheartedly and defends it all the time. He also accepts that some truths are not empirical but embedded in ideas, in stories, in literature, etc.

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

      Helen Pluckrose Retweeted Helen Pluckrose

      Yes, he does. This doesn't make sense.https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/929420602687016961 …

      Helen Pluckrose added,

      Helen Pluckrose @HPluckrose
      No, no, no. You cannot reasonably say 'I believe in objective truth and also that subjective, erroneous things can be true.' You can muck about with the word 'truth' until you give the impression this makes sense but, in fact, it does not.
      Show this thread
      3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose @ThomasFriedman_ and

      If your understanding of truth includes things which are objectively true and things which are objectively false and things which are unknown to be true or false you are not a believer in objective truth in the sense in which it is meant.

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    4. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
      Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

      What does he argue that is objectively false?

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

      God, probably.

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

      He's an atheist so that would be shocking.

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

      LOL. No, he isn't. His conception of God may be metaphorical but he still claims it as truth. Which is the whole point.

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

      Yes, he is. Again you fail to understand

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

      You keep telling me I fail to understand and then agreeing with me. I think this is unproductive and best left here.

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

      You cant claim he accepts objective truth while also claiming is rejects the objective. You cannot say he is like Postmodernists when he does not reject objectivity. Accepting that science has limitations and that truth can exist outside of it =/= objective truth doesn't exist.

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

      'I believe cats are mammals & that other mammals exist that are not cats'. Then you believe in mammals but not the 'catness' of mammals. 'I believe in objective truth & that other truths exist that are not objective'. Then you believe in truth but deny the objectivity of truth.

      11:38 AM - 11 Nov 2017
      • 1 Like
      • Mark Andrews
      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        1. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @ThomasFriedman_ and

          That was my last attempt to explain. I have set out this distinction clearly several times and if the analogy does not make it clear what PoMos & JP are criticised for, I will have to accept that you are determined not to understand.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo
        1. New conversation
        2. Thomas Friedman‏ @ThomasFriedman_ 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @HPluckrose @BrianBuchbinder @Gil_Ant

          You are completely incapable of understanding that the concept of believing in scientific fact and believing that there are truths scientific method cannot examine are compatible. You want to paint them as mutually exclusive when they are not.

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

          Hitchens had a great retort to this line of thinking. He basically said if something supernatural truly exists then it is by definition scientific. We just haven't discovered it yet. So no. Peterson can't have it both ways.

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

          We're not talking about supernatural claims, we're talking about the truths of human existence and being outside the wheelhouse of science where morality, ethics, and living exist. Belief in only science results in meaninglessness materialism and nihilism, or an unhappy existence

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @ThomasFriedman_ @HPluckrose and

          I disagree in specific ways if you'll indulge me. 1. Morality & Ethics: First off those are man made concepts. Humans are slaves to science & the laws of physics. So must be their concepts.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        6. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @sisboombahbah @ThomasFriedman_ and

          2. If we can agree that less human suffering is universally desirable moral outcome of civilization then again, where did that come from? Evolution? Fine. Still science & physics. Still an empirical truth.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        7. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @sisboombahbah @ThomasFriedman_ and

          3. Staying on morality, although you profess your non religious status the argument that morality comes from "outside" the physical realm is a religious argument. If you say morality is subjective then it's a PoMo argument. You say you're neither? Hmm.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        8. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @sisboombahbah @ThomasFriedman_ and

          4. While we don't have the answers for why humans (except 10% sociopathic) seem to be born with an innate mortality (studies prove this), the fact is that morality & ethics are no more outside the realm of science than clouds. Which, like behavior, can look magical but aren't.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        9. Yenrap Rellin‏ @sisboombahbah 11 Nov 2017
          Replying to @sisboombahbah @ThomasFriedman_ and

          5. As for your claim that a purely scientific outlook on life leads to an empty "materialistic" existence, again, science disproves this reductive & disproven assumption. At the risk of sounding like JP, we, our consciousness & thoughts, aren't material at all.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        10. 2 more replies

      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