twitter dodgeball

because we’ve all got to choose sides, apparently. (what’s being discussed in this tweet session.)

twitter dodgeball

previously: “to disbelieve in witchcraft is the greatest of heresies”

(note: comments do not require an email. dodgeball.)

Advertisements

27 Comments

  1. Well, as I was reminded in my Twitter spars with Ricky Raw, belief isn’t so much about getting at the truth, but symbolizing what team you’re on (the “it” that I “can’t get” presumably being that it’s not important if there are racial differences or not, but what is “important” that we stick to the doctrine that there are none).

    This is the case with political beliefs, as we see with “motivated reasoning”. That may be well and good for politics – sure whatever, but I am of the mind that we keep politics – and belief signalling – OUT of science.

    Reply

  2. @jayman – “I am of the mind that we keep politics – and belief signalling – OUT of science.”

    i’m with you on that one! but i don’t have too many hopes that we’ll get our wish — most people are “only human” to some degree or another, after all. =/

    Reply

  3. This is about “process”. If Richwine is wrong, he’s wrong on the merits of his case. Calling him racist, bigot, bully, unscientific, hateful or whatever are moralistic critiques designed to subvert the critical process known as science.

    This assault on Richwine isn’t about science or about having a rational “conversation” it’s poopoo flinging by big brained chimps.

    Evolutionary psychology on full display.

    Reply

  4. I’m not sure how serious Horgan is here:

    “*Clarification: Some readers may wonder what I mean by “ban,” so let me spell it out. I envision a federal prohibition against speech or publications supporting racial theories of intelligence. All papers, books and other documents advocating such theories will be burned, deleted or otherwise destroyed. Those who continue espousing such theories either publicly or privately (as determined by monitoring of email, phone calls or other communications) will be detained indefinitely in Guantanamo until or unless a secret tribunal overseen by me says they have expressed sufficient remorse and can be released.”

    Reply

  5. @elijah – that wasn’t there originally. he’s added that later, without indicating that it’s an update (bad blogging practice). he’s backpeddling because he’s taken so much flak.

    Reply

  6. @ElijahArmstrong: I think Horgan’s being facetious there – but that sentiment is dangerous whether he was kidding or not.

    Honestly, I’m damn sick and tired of the “dodgeball” (whether on Twitter or otherwise); all the mudslinging and pejoratives and inability to discuss controversial issues civilly makes me sick – and I’m not just talking about the Richwine issue. I’m talking politics in general. I’m just done with it.

    Knowing me though, I’d probably continue to tweet/retweet/blog about political issues I find interesting, even at the risk of pejoratives coming my way. There’s an old saw that goes “if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” – and damnit, I don’t feel like falling!

    (to the awesome hbd* chick: sorry for the rant.)

    Reply

  7. @nelson – “sorry for the rant”

    oh, you’ll hear the exact same rant from me most days. (~_^) and, hey — if you can’t rant here, where can you rant?! (^_^)

    Reply

  8. that *clarification* wasn’t on the post originally. that’s something that he added several hours after the original post was put up. =/

    Reply

  9. @hbd* chick: “if you can’t rant here, where can you rant?! (^_^)”

    Aw, thanks! I suppose there’s my blog, which has averaged all of 42 hits per day this year so far… ;-) (Mind you, that’s an increase over the average 18 hits per day in 2012!)

    About Horgan’s “clarification,” I wouldn’t be surprised if others have the same view toward others they disagree with or whose views they find “offensive.” So much for “tolerance…”

    Reply

  10. @nelson – “About Horgan’s ‘clarification’….”

    i wouldn’t mind his clarification, only the way he’s done it now — by NOT indicating that it’s a later edit — makes it look like he was kidding from the start. he wasn’t. (of course he didn’t mean to send iq researchers to guantanamo, but he DID mean to ban it!).

    Reply

  11. His first tweet does not even say he believes it to be WRONG, just mean.

    But life isn’t fair. Never was. Some people are born more susceptible to certain diseases, often horrible ones. Should we then try to deny it is genetic?

    Reply

  12. brilliant responses to that doofus horgan, btw.

    sadly, this whole kerfuffle steers the argument away from the actual argument/empirical evidence into some kind of meta-argument that ignores the evidence.

    I am thankful for all your excellent rallying to the defense & your salient & cogent points under pressure – this stuff makes me so mad that i can’t argue well (some people can debate well while emotional, some debate while holding emotion in abeyance, & some slow-pokes [moi] must wait to calm down to make sense — & then some people simply like to make others mad – viz., horgan).

    Reply

  13. “Horgan was never very bright.”

    This. The guys always has been a buffoon, he has just decided to open his mounth and remove all doubt. As John McCarthy once said “By denying the importance of objectivity in science, you have essentially announced your intention to lie to us. No one should listen to anything you have to say…”

    Reply

  14. None of this would be much of an issue if the left and other “egalitarians” didn”t insist on treating people as groups rather than individuals. The truth about racial differences would still be useful in many respects, but not incendiary. In any event, these fools brought this on themselves.

    Reply

  15. If the low-IQ are poor and powerless, wouldn’t that vindicate IQ research? More of the “don’t tell me things I believe” phenomenon.

    Reply

  16. Its not simply that politics should be “kept out of” science, its more that if politics is included it is NOT science. Science is more a method of inquiry than any particular conclusion, and if the method involves decidedly political motives, then it cannot be called science anymore.

    Reply

  17. I want to take back my comment above. Not quite sure what I meant, or what Horgan meant. Still think there is a large amount of “I’m afraid this might be true, don’t tell me more” going on.

    Reply

  18. @contemplationist – “Its not simply that politics should be ‘kept out of’ science, its more that if politics is included it is NOT science.”

    hear, hear! (^_^)

    Reply

  19. actually it’s not ‘hear’ as in ‘i hear you!’, it’s

    ‘here, here’

    as in, ‘this person here agrees with you’ (and will therefore likely support the motion when put to the vote)

    (ok now you can hate me for being an annoying pedant but i do think it’s interesting)

    Reply

  20. @kate – “actually it’s not ‘hear’ as in ‘i hear you!’, it’s ‘here, here’”

    gonna have to disagree with you there! see the grammarist and wikipedia. (^_^)

    (please, tell me i’m right, ’cause i’m still dealing with my discovery of a couple months ago that i’d been spelling/pronouncing ‘longitude’ wrong my ENTIRE LIFE — i always thought it was ‘longTitude.’ how embarassing. *facepalm!* (~_^) )

    Reply

  21. The correct term is, “hear, hear!” It is an abbreviation for “hear, all ye good people, hear what this brilliant and eloquent speaker has to say!”

    As of today (March 30, 2010) “here here” is still winning (but maybe “hear hear” is gaining?):

    here here: 2,720,000
    hear hear: 1,420,000

    Follow us on Twitter @tao_of_grammar

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s