1 2 3 > 
 
   
 

Helen Pluckrose - “The Rise and Whys of Grievance Studies”

 
JustAnotherPunter
 
Avatar
 
 
JustAnotherPunter
Total Posts:  3
Joined  12-10-2019
 
 
 
12 October 2019 00:36
 

This might interest some people..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy7O-xgN3hw

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
12 October 2019 12:35
 

Oh my! The people on this site are going to hate you posting this, if you are white and male, lie!

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
12 October 2019 15:12
 

The best thing posted here in years.

It eviscerates the ideology of the majority of the posters here. 

I wonder how they will try to get around it, they can’t accept it because that would mean they were wrong and their life was wasted.

Silence, dismiss, attack, will be interesting to watch.

 
 
Balfizar1
 
Avatar
 
 
Balfizar1
Total Posts:  18
Joined  11-07-2019
 
 
 
13 October 2019 03:48
 

Interesting and to further the conversation:-
Conversations with John Anderson: Featuring Helen Pluckrose

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVDneOXfgNk

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2822
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
13 October 2019 09:03
 

Anyone can get anything published in pay-to-print papers.
Unless something has a decent Impact Factor, dismissing it is perfectly normal.

Only journalists with nothing else to do pick up on these things.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 October 2019 09:14
 
Twissel - 13 October 2019 09:03 AM

Anyone can get anything published in pay-to-print papers.
Unless something has a decent Impact Factor, dismissing it is perfectly normal.

Only journalists with nothing else to do pick up on these things.

That has zero to do with this, you are not even trying.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 October 2019 19:16
 
Balfizar1 - 13 October 2019 03:48 AM

Interesting and to further the conversation:-
Conversations with John Anderson: Featuring Helen Pluckrose

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVDneOXfgNk

That was interesting but I would say to get a good understanding of the depth and breadth of her arguments the first link is the best.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6391
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
13 October 2019 20:21
 

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

I think her complaint is spot on at 18:58 to 19:40. But not as a complaint. It is a significant observation.

From 26:50 to 27:30, she mentions the traditionally liberal marketplace of ideas and how, to its practitioners, the post-modernists treat it as if did not exist and recast it as a power structure. Exactly. I think, in her playful mockery of post-modernists, she overlooks what her words are pointing at.

No matter how useful any new clever categorization might be, the public will make two incarnations of it and everyone will cherish one as correct and despise the other as a forgery. One’s opponents are folks who do not get right that which should be rightly gotten. What goes wrong? Why are all social aspirations perceived as nirvana by one side a living hell by the other? Who is being more stupid? I say it is the smart ones.

She speaks of two competing understandings of knowledge. That should be the crux of the examination. Unfortunately, all the investigating scientists involved are also worthy subjects of any investigation, as are those incomprehensible morons they make snooty references to. The inevitable mutual contempt is tasty and fulfilling but these science-folks need to step outside of that conflict, realize that they are one of the sides and not a control group, and be scientists about it. At least when they are on duty.

When everyone is finished calling the other side stupid, emotional, unreasoning, dishonest, fascist, greedy and tribal, we can get to work if there is anything left.

Other than that, I liked it. It was courageous if partisan.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 October 2019 21:38
 
Nhoj Morley - 13 October 2019 08:21 PM

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

Sorry, if that is not disingenuous then you clearly aren’t following and/or understanding what the patrons here believe.

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2822
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
13 October 2019 23:36
 
GAD - 13 October 2019 09:38 PM
Nhoj Morley - 13 October 2019 08:21 PM

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

Sorry, if that is not disingenuous then you clearly aren’t following and/or understanding what the patrons here believe.


or maybe you are projecting.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
14 October 2019 00:10
 
Twissel - 13 October 2019 11:36 PM
GAD - 13 October 2019 09:38 PM
Nhoj Morley - 13 October 2019 08:21 PM

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

Sorry, if that is not disingenuous then you clearly aren’t following and/or understanding what the patrons here believe.


or maybe you are projecting.

Go read the threads yourself.

Looks like we check the hand waving nothing to see here box for you.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6391
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
14 October 2019 00:46
 
GAD - 13 October 2019 09:38 PM
Nhoj Morley - 13 October 2019 08:21 PM

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

Sorry, if that is not disingenuous then you clearly aren’t following and/or understanding what the patrons here believe.

  Never disingenuous. It spoils the righteous sarcasm. I cannot say that I have manage to peg what every patron believes but I notice patterns in a poster’s approach. I can see fjords of nuance between the patrons and some of the cartoon versions you draw. You boast of clarity like it is something to be admired.

When things looks as clear as you tend to describe them, I consider that the starting line.
Let’s not cross the Klein and divert the thread. What the lady said might spark amusement, disagreement or a bit of ire in some, but, ruffle?

From my view, forum-folk seem to get more whipped up from the exchange than the content.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
14 October 2019 08:44
 
Nhoj Morley - 14 October 2019 12:46 AM
GAD - 13 October 2019 09:38 PM
Nhoj Morley - 13 October 2019 08:21 PM

I don’t know why this would ruffle any patrons here.

Sorry, if that is not disingenuous then you clearly aren’t following and/or understanding what the patrons here believe.

  Never disingenuous. It spoils the righteous sarcasm. I cannot say that I have manage to peg what every patron believes but I notice patterns in a poster’s approach. I can see fjords of nuance between the patrons and some of the cartoon versions you draw. You boast of clarity like it is something to be admired.

When things looks as clear as you tend to describe them, I consider that the starting line.
Let’s not cross the Klein and divert the thread. What the lady said might spark amusement, disagreement or a bit of ire in some, but, ruffle?

From my view, forum-folk seem to get more whipped up from the exchange than the content.

Um, white privilege is pushed hard here, if you are white and male your are racist and must be fixed, if you deny it it proves you are racist, implicit bias is pushed hard here, if you are white and male you are racist even if you don’t know it, if you are white and male you are the cause of all the problems in the world, if you are white and male and say other races and genders have responsibility for their own actions, you are racist and a misogynist, if you disagree with any view put forth by the female posters you are a misogynist, and on, and on it goes.

Pluckrose hits all these claims in her arguments and says there is no objective truth behind them, these are views are antithetical, if Pluckrose is right then the patrons here are not just wrong they dangerously wrong to wrongnesses fullest extent.   

Guess we can check the hand waving nothing to see here box for you as well.

 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1838
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
14 October 2019 11:10
 
JustAnotherPunter - 12 October 2019 12:36 AM

This might interest some people..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy7O-xgN3hw

I love this kind of presentation, and I very much appreciate the presenter’s analytical/philosophical style and efforts. I only wonder how accurate some of her claims are. Given that Ms. Pluckrose is obviously a superb inventor of fiction posing as nonfiction, vetting all of this fairly long presentation would involve a challenge, no doubt. Out of curiosity, I’d first look into her last name, though it’s probably okay.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17735
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
14 October 2019 17:28
 
nonverbal - 14 October 2019 11:10 AM
JustAnotherPunter - 12 October 2019 12:36 AM

This might interest some people..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy7O-xgN3hw

I love this kind of presentation, and I very much appreciate the presenter’s analytical/philosophical style and efforts. I only wonder how accurate some of her claims are. Given that Ms. Pluckrose is obviously a superb inventor of fiction posing as nonfiction, vetting all of this fairly long presentation would involve a challenge, no doubt. Out of curiosity, I’d first look into her last name, though it’s probably okay.

Guess we can check the attack, undermine and discredit without any actual arguments, facts, knowledge or expertise to back it up, box for you.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6801
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
14 October 2019 18:23
 

Very Bad Wizards mentioned this in a podcast last year. (Skip to the 4 minute mark.) Paul Bloom is their guest. If I recall correctly, they were somewhat supportive of the hoax, but also pointed out that the journals that fell for it weren’t the most reputable or discerning. So the hoax speaks more to the quality/gullibility of certain journals than to the field of so-called “grievance studies” in general.

It’s still pretty funny.

“Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria and Transphobia through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use”. Really???

[ Edited: 14 October 2019 18:26 by Antisocialdarwinist]
 
 
 1 2 3 >