So the victim would have half-raped herself? Still not working for you, dude.
-
-
Replying to @espiers @erikcorry
Scott never published his real name on his blog, he merely made it possible to find it with some sleuthing. Lots of SSC readers never knew his name, because they didn't do so. The ability to find his name with sleuthing was never Scott's concern. 1/3
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
His main concern was that patients could find his real name and his secondary concern was that crazy people could easily find it. 2/3
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
now, why would scott alexander siskind not want his patients to find that he used their cases for general entertainment of his blog readers? that's somewhat a mystery to my, but perhaps you have some insight here…
2 replies 1 retweet 69 likes -
It is fully consistent with APA guidelines to publish anonymized cases. If you have information that he didn't do so, you should report him to APA. But surely you are just a troll.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NotoriousAapje @_amtiskaw and
It's not about whether he committed a formal APA violation, it's about whether his patients might have been offended if they'd known the way he talked about patients on his blog, and if they'd have had a right to know about him doing so before going to him for treatment
3 replies 2 retweets 99 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
yeah when you put it like this, "do siskind's Black patients have a right to know that he thinks they are genetically inferior" seems like a pretty straightforward question to answer
4 replies 6 retweets 80 likes -
Replying to @perdricof @arthur_affect and
Does he believe they are genetically inferior? I've followed a few links people have presented as proof and I've yet to find anything of the sorts What I have found is the opposite
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @VierDrey @perdricof and
There are a couple things "the opposite" could mean: 1) Black people are genetically *superior* to white people 2) Eugenics is total bunk, and none of the important traits that people think of as "superior" or "inferior" can be mapped to genetic causes in any predictable way
2 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @perdricof and
Yeah, if you are stuck in that mindset, except there is at least one more - people are not inferior or superior when considering their "race"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ah, yes, the rhetorical dodge where IQ/the g-factor don't imply you're a better or worse *person* It's just that, in Scott's view, the g-factor determines how good you are at doing nearly anything that matters in life, and determines who can be safely trusted to make decisions
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @perdricof and
Also, do you have an automatic retweeter set up? Every response gets retweeted
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. 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.