... constantly examine 'obvious' things that are taken for granted, and ask whether they might productively be seen in a different light, and, in doing so, often do add useful tools to our epistemological toolkit for how we should approach various complex topics. ... Indeed, ...
-
-
... is threatened and undermined when orthodoxies form and you aren't allowed to question them (as I argue here: https://quillette.com/2016/07/02/in-praise-of-ambivalence-young-feminism-gender-identity-and-free-speech/ …); the hoax authors are right that to fight true injustice you need the BEST ideas, theories, data, etc., and that requires getting outside ...
Show this thread -
... your bubble where you just talk to other social justice researchers: if the goal is to help the marginalized and oppressed etc., they will NOT be helped in the long run by dogmas protected by blasphemy laws saying you can't critique them. But I think the hoax authors, too,
Show this thread -
... could do a better job of approaching those fields/journals in a more charitable way trying to see what is right/good/valuable/productive about them, in the spirit of improving them AND learning from them, rather than the "burn it down" kind of "gotcha" approach they took ...
Show this thread -
... Such bomb-throwing tactics to critiquing other fields may, in the long run, turn out to work/be valuable in causing improvement in the general level of rigor/quality (like those 'methodological terrorists' in psychology!); but might also create animus & further divisions ...
Show this thread -
... I guess we will see!
@NAChristakis predicts that all will come of this is greater effort on part of journals to verify author identities, rather than any kind of soul-searching and improvement. I would like to just see some soul-searching and expanded perspective taking & ...Show this thread -
... charitable/productive engagement happening all around; even when we really disagree w/ someone, there is often something valuable/right in their approach we can learn from (as Michael Hauskeller & I argue here https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/18491/Binocularity%20in%20Bioethics.pdf?sequence=1 … reviewing Erik Parens on "binocularity").
Show this thread -
... Just some initial thoughts & fodder for conversation here ... I am genuinely curious what folks think!
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Is all work in those fields intended to generate falsifiable theories? The *-theory/studies fields seem more heterogeneous to me (laymanly), with some methods presented as "different ways of knowing" outside the scope of science, not subjected to the same requirements.
-
Not to imply that scientific research consistently aims for falsifiability, as there is plurality if the phil. of science as well. Still, the methodological constraints of natural science research seem comparatively easier to grasp.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.