Agree with #2. But people please quit reinforcing inaccurate stereotypes. There is **zero** evidence that there’s more “worthless drivel” in gender studies than anywhere else.https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/1052766924621279232 …
-
-
Replying to @erinhengel
Out of curiosity, what sort of evidence would allow us to compare the amounts of drivel across fields with diverse methods, purposes, and domains of applicability?
6 replies 3 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion
I can’t think of any existing evidence that would allow us to compare fields. But a large scale Sokal^2 across a large number of fields (including economics!) obviously would
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erinhengel
Hmm...I think it might indicate the relevant *potential* for drivel, but perhaps not the *realized* drivel... But in any case, did you think that the failure of Sokal^2 to publish any papers in sociology journals suggests soc is more drivel-resistant?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion
When the researchers produced actual crap their papers were universally rejected. It’s only when they started fabricating data (and and really understanding the relevant literature) that their papers were accepted.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erinhengel
I thought they only fabricated data in one paper but managed to publish seven papers...?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion
I’m pretty sure that was their coup d’état paper. The other important journal was Hypatia. But before you get too judgemental, please familiarise yourself with contemporary (non-feminist) philosophy scholarship!
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Ditto 12 Rules... ;-)
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.