Look, if James Lindsay keeps having such an outsized impact among bigots, transphobes, white supremacists, and misogynists that says nothing, nothing at all about his intent! If you think you can talk to him about it, you are getting correlation and causation backwards! 😜
Take it from Mr. Moth.
Likewise, does it matter what Lindsay's intent is if his impact is leaning consistently towards bigotry? And he keeps denying it does? Does it matter that he thinks he's progressive ackshually, he was for gay marriage?
Not really.
Likewise, does it matter what Lindsay's intent is if his impact is leaning consistently towards bigotry? And he keeps denying it does? Does it matter that he thinks he's progressive ackshually, he was for gay marriage?
Not really.
Because, you know, life didn't stop, society didn't stop, the world didn't stop when, decades ago, in your youthful exuberance, you said that gay marriage should be legal when it wasn't already.
While I'm at it, let me clarify one thing. I sometimes get the question: If you don't like their work, why are you paying so much attention to Lindsay, Boghossian, Pluckrose et al.? Are you obsessed with them or something? Isn't it a bit creepy how you keep reading their posts?
It turns out that even after they block me--like Lindsay & Pluckrose have--I keep reading and commenting on their tweets & other public writing.
I must be a weirdo!
Well, I like to think of myself as a bit weird, I admit. But that's beside the point.
I must be a weirdo!
Well, I like to think of myself as a bit weird, I admit. But that's beside the point.
Consider that what you call creepy sneaking-around-the-block I call research.
Potayyto potahhto.
Two arguments.
Potayyto potahhto.
Two arguments.
One.
Lindsay, Boghossian, Pluckrose et al. keep saying ill-informed and tendentious things about the work of my colleagues and about areas of research related to mine. They keep saying it to audiences who are happy to announce they'd like my area of work entirely abolished.
Lindsay, Boghossian, Pluckrose et al. keep saying ill-informed and tendentious things about the work of my colleagues and about areas of research related to mine. They keep saying it to audiences who are happy to announce they'd like my area of work entirely abolished.
I like to be able to know what they're saying and I like to be able to respond.
Isn't that what possible conversation is about.
Or, I'd like to be able to know what public accusations are against my work and defend myself. You can almost call that a natural right.
Isn't that what possible conversation is about.
Or, I'd like to be able to know what public accusations are against my work and defend myself. You can almost call that a natural right.
Two.
It is my research area. I study disciplinary forms of knowledge-making and processes of scholarly writing and publishing. Since they came out with the #Sokalsquared hoax, I've commented on their claims on humanities & social science research from my research perspective.
It is my research area. I study disciplinary forms of knowledge-making and processes of scholarly writing and publishing. Since they came out with the #Sokalsquared hoax, I've commented on their claims on humanities & social science research from my research perspective.
You can do a combined search of the #Sokalsquared hashtag and my Twitter handle, and it will all be there. I've not deleted anything. I've used the hashtag as my archiving tool for my ongoing public work on the issue. I'm a researcher that way.
If you want to call the way an epidemiologist looks for hours through rates of infection and death an unhealthy obsession, you may call my hours of reading L, B, & P commenting publicly with faux authority on methods of knowledge-making & scholarly writing an unhealthy obsession.
I would prefer you didn't call it that, however. 🙃
@threadreaderapp unroll
