But they massively disagree with one another! And the discussion is open. And, in a charitable reading, it would seem unsurprising that those interested in the logical underpinnings would know one another. They are a community in the same way as the V1 people are a community.
-
-
She's generously chosen to do a lot of explaining already, so I'll take a stab at this. I believe her intent was to declare an attitude for engaging on (science) twitter and invite others to adopt it. The language of prayer is to convey hope, redemption, and communal adoption.
-
I dunno if that was grotesque mansplaination but I feel like there are a few people doing a lot of the heavy lifting and they need a break
-
I think that if you're not willing to fight for your ideas they won't get much traction, even if they're right. And it's well known that putting them out there as strongly as possible is the best way to expose their flaws. Nothing wrong with being wrong.
-
I don't disagree, but I think tone and context are challenging on twitter. And the concerns are over tone & intent. "Strength" is an ambiguous word. A clear, well-formulated argument and "I dont believe u cuz fMRI sux" are both "strong" statements.
-
put another way, I want to put ideas against each other, not people. Displays of social dominance in one's tone serve to put one person above another, rather than one idea above another.
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.
