arguing with anyone other than an epistemic peer is not thinking
-
-
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing What do you mean by epistemic peer in this case?1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LogicalAnalysis
@LogicalAnalysis a person with whom you have enough trust/cognitive overlap that you take it VERY seriously if they disagree6 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing different backgrounds. But would we want to say that's not thinking? Not every exchange between dissimilars is primarily a1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LogicalAnalysis
@LogicalAnalysis personally I have epistemic peers from very different backgrounds - not that background is irrelevant1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing Me too. That's why I think this notion of epistemic peer might be too broad, as is. Or too narrow.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@LogicalAnalysis there seems to be a core human interface through which thinking can occur at a high bandwidth - a bit mysterious though
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.