And when you say you don't care about policy, you're saying there is no practical implication of this for anyone's decision-making? Or are you saying that whatever practical implication it has isn't something that you consider policy-relevant?
-
-
Replying to @davidmanheim @bechhof
This is really uncharacteristic of you. What's going on?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @bechhof
Uncharacteristic? Treating weak and useless evidence as useful is a pet peeve - https://medium.com/@davidmanheim/the-good-the-bad-and-the-appropriately-under-powered-82c335652930 … And causality for decisions and the difficulty of decisionmaking via causal inferences is a hobby horse of mine as well.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davidmanheim @bechhof
no I mean the bit about assuming your interlocutors hold the weakest or most odious version of arguments that might be associated with their explicit statements
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @bechhof
Fair. But I'm frustrated that people are holding on to a claim that is unrelated to evidence in a discussion that started with policy relevance - otherwise, why is the claim that the difference is immutable? (This point was discussed extensively in the original article.)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @davidmanheim @eigenrobot
Weird is that people assume Klein is claiming that intelligence isn’t heritable when he doesn’t say that
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
heh going full circle, that article I was actually not able to read "professional Media Figures discuss their stupid dispute about Politic's" golly :kms:
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.