Wait, I’m not seeing how it’s possible to distinguish at all? Like, whatever your motivations, you’re guessing and are either (A) right or (B) wrong, and you can’t tell til you’re on the other side?
-
-
-
I really am a believer in the idea that, given sufficient consumption of available evidence, you'll ascend towards better ideas and understanding. It's just that you can't consume information and experimentation sufficiently at a generalist level — there is too much to know.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Depends on the field and the time period, I'd say. Some fields the orthodoxy is so creaky that there are a lot more pieces of valuable heterodoxy floating around.
-
Yea. Although very often even in those cases the loudest of the heterodox present their heterodoxy as if it *was not* a well-known and growing self-criticism of the field, which is frustrating because that actually inhibits necessary corrections.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The twitter “heterodoxy” type that that is generally not a pre-consensus advance can be spotted easily because their ideas are often ... consensus in the past but has been abandoned in the presence.
-
IDK i feel like most of the crazy ideas I have encountered on twitter are usually just either old school racism or some leftist/ Christian integral rightist ideas that a bunch of French philosophers/theologians had made.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yea. The in-between space is usually the fertile one.
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.