it looks like you got memed into becoming a feminist scholar, man, I'm sorry you had to find out this way
-
-
Replying to @admittedlyhuman
I know I'm a feminist scholar now. That's what I set out to do. Thanks for noticing.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @ConceptualJames
then why are you holding it out as a hoax? you engaged with the literature and wrote real papers and you're shocked when they're published?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @admittedlyhuman @ConceptualJames
if you can be intentionally stupid while playing by the rules of a system, putting forth obvious nonsense by any external standard, and it then accepts and integrates your contributions, this implies the system doesn't have an obvious nonsense detector, whatever rules it may have
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @teleonomist @ConceptualJames
it's like, Sokal's Feminist Room. if you manipulate the symbols the same as a real human being, what does your internal experience matter?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
what's to stop me from saying "oh, those linguistics papers I wrote were intentionally stupid, it was all a hoax, linguistics disproven"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
it seems like the only part that's doing any work is the "obvious nonsense by any external standard". but the real papers are also that
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
they would have to be, because you have written real papers! so why bother? why not just point at the already-existing obvious nonsense?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
if I think math is dumb, should I learn to write math papers and contribute to the literature? just post a blog mocking "imaginary numbers".
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
The difference is you can't get a math paper published by learning to imitate the way a mathematician talks
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I mean, if you imitated it well enough you definitely could.
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.