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 Mar 6
      Replying to @alexsimonelis

      Yes, you can. The claim that one can only look at them in the way they've always been looked at - through philosophy and theology - does not need to be respected. Dawkins addresses this in intro of TGD. I addressed it here:https://areomagazine.com/2017/05/15/where-now-for-new-atheists/ …

      1 reply 3 retweets 6 likes
    2. Rick von SLAYger‏ @RickVonJaeger Mar 6
      Replying to @HPluckrose @alexsimonelis

      you mean if you define things scientifically, wow, you can address anything scientifically, wowee. wowzers. holy cow, stop the presses, the atheists have done it again. how did they get so smart these guys.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
      Replying to @RickVonJaeger @OldSaintRiot @alexsimonelis

      I don't know what that means. I know we don't always have to look at God according to theological and philosophical assumptions. Don't worry. There are still plenty of books that do if that's all you want. Centuries of them.

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    4. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
      Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

      I think we'll end up disagreeing here. The ultimate tool of science generally is math proof. There is no proof that God exists, neither that He doesn't. Less strongly, evidence, but both sides look at the same facts as see them as evidence for opposite conclusions.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
      Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

      Well, no, proving a negative is impossible. That's why we wait for evidence before considering something a serious proposition.

      1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
    6. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
      Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

      That's a myth. Math, for example, abounds in negative proofs. One can prove that 1.0 has no immediately adjacent real number in a few seconds. Also possible in physics, ...

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
      Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

      How? By showing something positive? How do you show that a being with no real description or location does not exist? You can't. There could be mermaids in some part of the universe. We can't prove there aren't.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    8. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
      Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

      1-How do you prove no immed-adj number next to 1.o? By contradiction - happy to show you if you like. 2-How to show God's non-existence? That's a problem for whoever makes that asserion. Onus is always on the asserter, neg or pos.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
      Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

      Is the bonus of proof not on the person making the positive claim? But it doesn't matter much. If no-one claims a god to exist, I don't need to question that. If a claim is unfalsifiable, it cannot become a hypothesis.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
      Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

      Onus of proof is on the person who makes ANY claim, positive or negative or ... Atheists asserting God's non-existence are not exempt. Don't want to have to prove it? Then don't make that claim.

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
      Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

      I'll just say it's not a serious proposition until there's some evidence for it. That will do. No need to be claiming to know things that can't be known. When it comes down to more specific religious claims, these can be disproven.

      10:08 PM - 6 Mar 2018
      • 2 Likes
      • Stålfreddan AxeGrrl 🎸
      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
          Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

          Ah, evidence. What I said before: we'll both look at the same facts and claim them as evidence for our opposite beliefs. Take a look at Wheeler's delayed choice experiment and see whether it isn't "magical". Cheers!

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
          Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

          But God isn't a serious proposition yet. Just say we don't know the causes of everything. It's so easy. You can keep magic as an option, obviously, but I'm voting against it because every mystery solved so far has turned out not to be not magic. (Tim MInchin)

          1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
        4. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
          Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

          Very serious, as some of history's greatest minds have shown. Have a look at Wheeler's : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%27s_delayed_choice_experiment … See if you think it's possible, other than by design.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
          Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

          The greatest minds do not necessarily apply their minds to reality. Alchemy isn't real despite Newton thinking it was. I don't know how this is possible. Imagining a designer seems like something a designing species would do. We are necessarily limited in our understanding.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        6. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
          Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

          Humans are imperfect, including Newton, but still one of the greatest minds ever. Godel (recent) was one of the smartest humans EVER, producing a Proof that is amazing. He was a believer. You'll find smarties on both sides.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
          Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

          Which is why it doesn't prove anything. Our intuitions tell us there is a god. Religiosity is pan cultural. My daughter invented one when she was 3. There are some good hypotheses about why we do this but we may never know.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        8. Alex Simonelis‏ @alexsimonelis Mar 6
          Replying to @HPluckrose @OldSaintRiot

          Neither side proves anything. :-)

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Mar 6
          Replying to @alexsimonelis @OldSaintRiot

          That's what I just said! For a long time, the smartest people thought headaches in women were caused by the uterus wandering about.

          0 replies 1 retweet 4 likes
        10. 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