Azhir Mahmood  🚀 🤖 🧬 🧠 🪐

New blogpost: If we all want the same things, why can't we be friends? In which I try - perhaps misguidedly - to see the value in the different traditions of methodological reform despite their apparent (twitter) conflicts. http://babieslearninglanguage.blogspot.com/2021/02/methodological-reforms-or-if-we-all.html …

I'm curious why you chose the framing "center vs radicals". It implies a certain proper perspective for the one group and seems to belittle the other. Why write it this way if your goal is to build bridges?

I don’t see that implication, to be honest. But then I’ve been doing ‘radical embodied cognitive science’ for a long time so the term radical is all about deep, fundamental change (vs fringe view) for me

Agree with Brad. The use of language and framing is important. Using a loaded political analogy isn’t wise, especially when you’re talking about colleagues in the scientific community and trying to bridge divides across ideologies.

If it’s bugging people, then another option is clearly the way to go. I’m just voting ‘not bugged’ :)

I just noticed it as a silly unfortunate communication mistake. I’m not in the field so it doesn’t phase me and got the intent. It’s just a good rule fo thumb you pickup when managing startups and think about public perception ... etc.

Startups and founders love being called radical. We perceive ourselves as radical innovators. Academia — nope. It’s much more conservative, so radical has negative connotations. ___ It’s just about thinking who your audience is.

Radical isn’t bad in my neck of the woods, because I’m in the radical neck :)