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

      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
    2. 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
    3. 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
    4. 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
    5. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness

      a) Yes. I also worry it would make it more conservative - it's hard enough to get niche papers about weird ideas published already (speaking as someone who is trying) b) Probably, but not easily. c) No. It requires unilateral coordination from people it would hurt.

      1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
    6. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @DRMacIver @Meaningness

      Maybe that was too harsh. You might be able to do something with the idea on a sort of alt-peer-review basis - build a community of people who are actively working on improving their research together and use it as a sort of "certification" process by submitting preprints to it.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    7. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @DRMacIver @Meaningness

      So people would continue to publish under the normal system, but people who have been sokal-certified get more kudos because it makes their paper look more respectable.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @DRMacIver @Meaningness

      Still has the conservatism bias problem though, and I think that's intrinsic to the proposal.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @DRMacIver @Meaningness

      Another issue is that it's really easy to Sokal by going cross discipline (indeed this is how he did it) because it's very hard to review those well with only one expertise, which would create a large bias against legitimate cross disciplinary work

      1 reply 2 retweets 9 likes
    10. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @DRMacIver

      Excellent point, yes. OTOH, it’s also exceptionally easy to get rubbish published that way (sprinkle some irrelevant math in a paper in any soft-science field). I know many people who have been extremely successful that way. So extra skepticism is warranted.

      1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
      David Chapman‏ @Meaningness 3 Oct 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @Meaningness @DRMacIver

      Since much of my own work has been cross-disciplinary, this problem is acute for me…

      10:18 AM - 3 Oct 2018
      • 1 Retweet
      • 2 Likes
      • Maaike Verbruggen Corn Woman 🌽 𝐀𝐧𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐰 𝐖𝐞𝐭𝐳𝐞𝐥
      1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @Meaningness

          Yeah I think the current system is just very poorly set up for cross disciplinary work.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        3. David R. MacIver‏ @DRMacIver 3 Oct 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @DRMacIver @Meaningness

          TBH my preferred patch is probably to weaken rather than strengthen peer review and create better mechanisms for post publication checking. Publication needs to indicate interesting rather than true

          1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
        4. 2 more replies

      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