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 Jan 30
      Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      It's not automatic. It's to do with the ideas. If you think they are wrong, you necessarily think people who think they are right are mistaken. We don't have to believe all belief systems are equally valid. Some are just wrong & people who believe them mistaken.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    2. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      How can we ever criticise anything if it is bad faith to say people are wrong about it?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    3.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

      It's fine to say ideas are wrong, and that people are wrong for expressing them, but if you don't attempt to explain WHY they're wrong, it's not really criticism it's just character assasination. Perhaps, as you say in the other response, he's written well & extensively about

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    4. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      No, honestly, people can write about social phenomena and psychology and movements. It really is OK. Gurwinder Bhogal wrote an excellent thing on the appeal of fundamentalist Islam. He didn't need to include why Islam isn't true.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      In the same way, religious people can write about this without first having to explain why God is real. We know that people have different views on this - theist/atheist, pragmatist/empiricist. They can write all sorts of things from those perspectives.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    6.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

      I agree with you. But if you write about social/psychological phenomena in a way that characterizes a broad swath of people (particularly in the latter case, where you're interpreting their internal proceses as well as external characteristics) as rubes, you should expect them

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      Neither 'rubes' nor 'dupes' appears in that piece. This is clearly how you feel about someone giving a psychological explanation for the attraction to Peterson's rhetoric. It is v similar to how religious people feel when people look at the psychological reasons for their belief

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      Because they think it is really true and feel wounded that people who think it isn't want to look at why they are drawn to these ideas. It's obvious to them. It's because it's true! So they keep on & on insisting people debate them on the rightness of their beliefs. #Devotion

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    9.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
      Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

      Oh for chrissakes, he literally uses the phrase "snake oil". I don't agree with all of Peterson's ideas; attempting to nudge me into the "jilted believer" box is exactly the sort of condescension I'm talking about. People are annoyed because they've been mischaracterized. 1/

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    10.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
      Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

      Glossing over their arguments on the assumption they're just misguided is exactly the sort of devotion to one set of ideas you're accusing me of. I never said James didn't have the right to write his piece. I just don't believe he's above criticism.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
      Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

      Its not glossed over. Its not the subject of the essay. We've been here. Is your criticism that he should have addressed the beliefs of the movement rather than its psychological appeal? Do you make the same criticism of Murray?

      6:18 PM - 30 Jan 2018
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
          Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

          I haven't defended Murray once.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
          Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

          Is that a yes?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
          Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

          I skimmed Murray's piece but I remember it striking me as a puff piece from a guy who already agreed with Peterson & wasn't really engaging deeply, so if I understand your question correctly then yes.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
          Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

          I've given up. I can't get to the bottom of your objection except that it seems to be that he should have both written from a different angle - an epistemic one rather than a psychological one - and acknowledged value in the ideas - even if he didn't think they had any.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        6.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 30
          Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

          No, that's not it, I don't feel I have the right to dictate his subject or tone. I'm out of ways to rephrase so I'll have to go think about it for a while.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Jan 30
          Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @AnglerFishLure

          OK. I really am genuinely confused. Not being difficult. Goodnight!

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        8.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 31
          Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

          If I specify the grounds on which a critique is based, you can respond either on those grounds or by changing them. If I say, "there is no empirical evidence of God", you can either provide some or change the parameters of the debate. But either way we can have the debate.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        9.  🌴Baloo the Bear 🌴‏ @_Baloo_The_Bear Jan 31
          Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure

          But if I say, "the Qur'an is bullshit" without specifying grounds, I've taken the objective perspective & it's just a provocation. It might be justified, and I certainly have the right to do it, but I should expect nothing but hostility b/c there's no debate to be had.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        10. 5 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