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
Meaningness's profile
David Chapman
David Chapman
David Chapman
@Meaningness

Tweets

David Chapman

@Meaningness

Better ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—around problems of meaning and meaninglessness; self and society; ethics, purpose, and value.

meaningness.com/about-my-sites
Joined September 2010

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • 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. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      7️⃣ How would this work in practice? A paper would have to be registered as a Sokaling before first submission, along with an explanation of what the author thinks is wrong with it. A cryptographic time-locked database could ensure honesty about this.

      4 replies 6 retweets 69 likes
      Show this thread
    2. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      7️⃣½ [That is, everyone could publicly verify whether or not a paper was intended as a Sokal. Once it was accepted, the author could unlock the pre-registration; after a determinate time period had elapsed, it would automatically unlock in any case.]

      1 reply 3 retweets 34 likes
      Show this thread
    3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      8️⃣ Fraud—invented facts—are a different problem from nonsense. In science, publishing a paper based on false, made-up data would not generally count. Either you use real data and give a bogus interpretation, or you describe a worthless data-collection process (with fake data).

      1 reply 7 retweets 46 likes
      Show this thread
    4. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      9️⃣ This proposal is not nice. Unfortunately, it is too late for nice. Many-to-most academic fields run on a go-along-to-get-along basis, and now have large negative net value as a result. Some fields should simply end. I suggested that for nutrition:https://meaningness.com/nutrition-resigns …

      1 reply 11 retweets 81 likes
      Show this thread
    5. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      🔟 A tension here: academia is increasingly awful as a career. That drives away many of the best researchers. Reforms that add to the suffering risk making a bad situation even worse. Currently, reviewing papers is unpaid scut-work. Not surprising not everyone does it well.

      1 reply 8 retweets 51 likes
      Show this thread
    6. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣1️⃣ If peer review has reputational risk—it will be public knowledge if you recommend accepting a deliberately bad paper—many people may decline the job. (Though, successful detection of a hoax should look good on your CV!) Publishers might have to pay reviewers…

      2 replies 3 retweets 37 likes
      Show this thread
    7. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣2️⃣ … and the total number of papers published might drop precipitously if reviewers were more reluctant to recommend publication. That would be good. Everyone agrees there’s WAY too much stuff published under the current system. A 90% reduction would be great.

      4 replies 3 retweets 57 likes
      Show this thread
    8. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣3️⃣ I’d suggest that every PhD student be required to perform at least one attempt at Sokaling as a graduation requirement. Learning what should count as unacceptably bad research is a critical part of learning how to do it well. And of spotting the difference in the lit.

      3 replies 12 retweets 65 likes
      Show this thread
    9. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣4️⃣ Initially, everyone would go for low-hanging fruit in Sokaling attempts: the easiest ways to get nonsense past reviewers. Reviewers would quickly catch on to the simplest tricks… then subtler errors. And I hope this would lead to a virtuous upward spiral of quality.

      2 replies 3 retweets 45 likes
      Show this thread
    10. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣5️⃣ Three questions: 𝔸) Would this make academia more adversarial, and thereby even more awful? 𝔹) Can a system develop that is adequately resistant to gaming (Goodhart’s Law)? ℂ) Is it realistic to imagine something like this could actually happen?

      6 replies 6 retweets 54 likes
      Show this thread
      David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      1️⃣6️⃣ I’d love to hear your opinions about 𝔸 & 𝔹 ! As for ℂ — the crisis in academia is now obvious to all. Things cannot go on as they are. Unusual action becomes possible in extremis. Recent dramatic process reforms in social psychology are startling, and inspiring.

      9:55 AM - 3 Oct 2018
      • 5 Retweets
      • 42 Likes
      • Daniel Houck Ara Vartanian Alex AZ Soup Dogg giulio rospigliosi suzanne bachelor № Jeff Coleman 🦋 Cornelia Oldekamp
      9 replies 5 retweets 42 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Bob Peterson‏ @rwpeterson 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          This reminds me of the blind injection of fake gravitational wave signals in LIGO. For them, a small cabal in the collaboration does the dirty work. In my subfield, big shot groups would have to divert energy from competing with each other to do this.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @rwpeterson

          I haven’t heard about that (with LIGO)! Can you say more?

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 2 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Dan listens to the sudden reconfiguration‏ @danlistensto 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          Dan listens to the sudden reconfiguration Retweeted Richard Feynman

          this ought to be the default position in all kinds of research, especially research where methods produce, at best, correlative results.https://twitter.com/ProfFeynman/status/1047530013929553920 …

          Dan listens to the sudden reconfiguration added,

          Richard Feynman @ProfFeynman
          It’s OK to say “I don’t know.”
          1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
        3. Dan listens to the sudden reconfiguration‏ @danlistensto 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @danlistensto @Meaningness

          I think adversarial "red team" actors will be partially effective but also divisive and prone to politicization for all the usual reasons, mostly because there's money and career status at stake. A shift in norms to make it more acceptable to say "I don't know" is best

          0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        4. End of conversation
        1. fab13n‏ @fab13n 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          I think it would divert energy into Sokal-chasing. It would become a sophisticated game, the way securing funding has become a sophisticated bureaucratic and interpersonal game. To the detriment of time+energy spent actually doing science.

          0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo
        1. New conversation
        2. Eric Scrivner‏ @etscrivner 4 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          W.r.t. (A) there is definitely an implementation of this that makes academia more adversarial, and more miserable, especially in the short term given the scope of the problem.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Eric Scrivner‏ @etscrivner 4 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @etscrivner @Meaningness

          In a way it’s like a low-level continuous Denial of Service (DoS) against academia. Most large enough technology companies experience such low-level attacks and can eventually automatically detect and prevent them. Something similar could possibly be developed here.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 1 more reply
        1. New conversation
        2. Ron Pressler‏ @pressron 5 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          I think that what you're referring to as a crisis has been the case with academia for 2k years (have you read academic publications, even post sci-rev, say, 17th, 18th, 19th c.?) and is mostly a case of mismatched expectations.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Ron Pressler‏ @pressron 5 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @pressron @Meaningness

          Academics, even respectful ones, used to regularly publish proofs of God's existence, described non-existing animals, and in 19th-20th cs wrote a lot on race and eugenics. Academia was never "fixed." It just doesn't work the way you think it's supposed to.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        4. 5 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. DM Berger‏ @DM_Berger 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          I'd debate to what degree ℂ is truly "obvious to all". There are still papers coming out arguing there is no crisis, and surveys finding large (albeit minority) portions of various scientific communities not seeing problems. Ideology also means many *want* the fields this way >>

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. DM Berger‏ @DM_Berger 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @DM_Berger @Meaningness

          I saw plenty of left social psychologists acting like this hoax was "no big deal" and various other forms of downplaying, almost entirely predictable by the partisan alignment of the social psychologist. I fear ideological polarization makes the problem not (currently) solvable.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. 1 more reply

      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

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Imprint
        • Cookies
        • Ads info