My first glimpse at peer review was via a friend (math PhD student) who spent weeks trying to find a proof for an obscure mathematical assumption before rejecting the paper on that basis. Tbh this makes my eyes roll that much harder at the trashfire that is much of social science
-
-
To think about the tension between the humanities and the sciences, you might find "The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution" an illuminating read; (bonus:
@pmarca discussed it in one of his interviews). https://www.amazon.com/Two-Cultures-Scientific-Revolution/dp/1614275475/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1538703267&sr=8-1&keywords=two+cultures+snow …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Here's MY ton: 1. to understand what constitutes being human 2. not at all and they don't have to 3. don't worry, the philosopher's stomach will do the trick, once empty 4. not at all, politeness is prevalent
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
How would this work in practice? A paper would have to be registered as a Sokaling before first submission, along with an explanation of what the author thinks is wrong with it. A cryptographic time-locked database could ensure honesty about this.