Emil O W Kirkegaard

How far can "concept creep" be stretched? Yes, that is where we are differing.

You mean like "words are violence"? Or "white silence is violence"? I have conceded that aborting defective fetuses is only eugenics-adjacent, not quite pure eugenics. I am pretty sure there is way less concept creep here than there. Way super gigantically massively less.

I don't think the existence of absurd concept creep on the SJW left is a reason for its critics to adopt the same tactics.

Completely fair. Note that I did back off a bit there. However, I also had a hidden agenda, revealed here:https://twitter.com/PsychRabble/status/1124469793124491264 …

Point taken! Re Noah Carl, I'm trying to look into this (while ostensibly on vacation in Munich, lol). I don't think "guilt by association" is *always* invalid -- e.g. if someone contributes to a Holocaust denial journal, it's a fair thing to hold against them, IMO.

I'm not saying that any of Carl's associations are on that level, btw. Just speaking to the general principle.

The Open Psych thing looks kinda dodgy to me in that it looks like Noah Carl & Emil Kierkegaard were peer-reviewing each other's papers a lot. But I'm sure you're right there's a lot of dodgy stuff in psych in general.

The issue there, to me, is more this: Did Carl present the OpenPsych stuff AS peer reviewed? Then that would be deceptive and cross my ethical lines. But if not? We academics pub stuff in nonpeer reviewed outlets all the time.