"this his how other's do it, if we do it differently, reviewers will reject"... is what I got.
What I really find difficult about the causality debate in neuroscience is that when I say "your method does not establish causality but your field claims causality" I near universally hear "but other fields do the same". #NotAnArgument #CausalTruthExists
-
-
-
Isn't it insane!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It seems to be a near universal problem since the end of scientific modernism in the 1970ies. Science does no longer define itself by questions, but by the application of methods. I sometimes wonder whether academia can recover from it or if it needs a reboot.
-
What makes science science _is_ the method (the scientific method). Where's the problem?
-
The problem is this: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Do you tend to find double disassociations strong causal claims?
-
No. Not even close. There is not a single credible causal inference paper that shows that a double dissociation estimator would be valid. afaik.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It’s the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum “If all your friends jumped off a bridge...” That elementary logic class I took as an undergrad is still paying off!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
people don't like to question things "we've always done this way"...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And you can't blame them for this misuse!!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.