Do you think that you and Claire are in agreement on a number of issues surrounding the 'HBD' movement? Would it be fair to say that Claire is, in your opinion, in agreement with the aims and positions of the 'HBD' movement?
-
-
Replying to @nathanoseroff @Steve_Sailer and
there isn't an "hbd movement." this is exactly why i wanted to clealy define what hbd is.pic.twitter.com/ilGNIEtpf6
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick @Steve_Sailer and
I understand that, but I'd like to differentiate 'HBD' from many of the people that advocate 'HBD', as we would do between, for example, a theory and people that attempt to popularise the theory in public discourse. I hope that makes sense.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @nathanoseroff @Steve_Sailer and
what do you mean by advocate hbd? like physicists advocate gravity? ???
2 replies 1 retweet 34 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick @nathanoseroff and
oh. and human biodiversity isn't a theory. we know that individuals and pops differ biologically.
1 reply 0 retweets 20 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick @Steve_Sailer and
I disagree: I work in philosophy of science and my thesis is on this particular area, in fact. If you believe that HBD isn't a theory, then you are likely operating with a different use of the word 'theory' than I am (e.g. as 'nothing but an educated guess and with no support').
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @nathanoseroff @Steve_Sailer and
now that i've answered your questions, perhaps you would answer mine. what do you mean by human biodiversity being a theory?
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick @Steve_Sailer and
It's a theoretical system (i.e. a Lakatosian 'hard core' with a set of auxiliary hypotheses and background knowledge) that, if treated as empirically predictive by an epistemic community, is classified as 'empirical; if not, then it is not classified as 'empirical'.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @nathanoseroff @Steve_Sailer and
but it's not a theoretical system. the term simply describes a set of facts, i.e. that humans are biodiverse.
1 reply 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @hbdchick @Steve_Sailer and
If it's not a theoretical system then there's no predictive content; what you're saying now (i.e. 'humans are biodiverse') is no different than a 'biologicised' variation of the indiscernibility of identicals: two things cannot share all the same properties.
5 replies 0 retweets 11 likes
In some sense, HBD is obviously a theory. But compare these two theories. 1) Multiple birds exist on earth 2) Anxiety is caused by amount of dopamine in the amygdala There's obviously a difference between them and HBDchick is maybe trying to point to that difference.
-
-
Replying to @LevelOAnalysis @nathanoseroff and
Some ways they differ: Is it a causal model? Does this model involve difficult to observe features of reality? How confident should we be in each model? How confident are you that the terms in each model refer to natural kinds?
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.