Cultural Marxism and Postmodernism are nothing more than an attempt to use secular pseudoscientific language as ancients used the language of mysticism: for deceit.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 03:04:00 UTC
Cultural Marxism and Postmodernism are nothing more than an attempt to use secular pseudoscientific language as ancients used the language of mysticism: for deceit.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 03:04:00 UTC
What’s it mean to be a philosopher? What is this thing we call philosophy? We could say that it is a discipline by which we learn the craft of reasoning. So, many of us philosophize just as many of us repair machines, or do housework, or use mathematics. But using these tools is different from demonstrating a mastery of them, or demonstrating one’s ability of surviving a competition with others who may do it better. Or creating innovative ideas using reason.
What’s it mean to be a philosopher? What is this thing we call philosophy? We could say that it is a discipline by which we learn the craft of reasoning. So, many of us philosophize just as many of us repair machines, or do housework, or use mathematics. But using these tools is different from demonstrating a mastery of them, or demonstrating one’s ability of surviving a competition with others who may do it better. Or creating innovative ideas using reason.
The only voice of authority is not synthesis (advocacy) but neutral criticism (science). Yet this is not culture of news.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:54:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735725748342788096
Reply addressees: @brianstelter
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735706835349471232
IN REPLY TO:
@brianstelter
Warren Buffett’s bleak view of his beloved newspaper biz: “We haven’t cracked the code yet…” https://t.co/X1F7miA6sv
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735706835349471232
All ideas originate on the internet, but no synthetic editorial voice across them. Need era of empirical (analytic) news.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:53:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735725550472298496
Reply addressees: @brianstelter
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735706835349471232
IN REPLY TO:
@brianstelter
Warren Buffett’s bleak view of his beloved newspaper biz: “We haven’t cracked the code yet…” https://t.co/X1F7miA6sv
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735706835349471232
Data is clear: Papers don’t work. Books do. Can’t write a book? Then you don’t have anything worth saying.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:45:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735723632912039936
Reply addressees: @charlesmurray @real_peerreview
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/726375406950047745
IN REPLY TO:
@charlesmurray
I admire @real_peerreview in principle, and yet find it cumulatively depressing. So much idiocy, coming at me relentlessly….
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/726375406950047745
We can explain deductively once we understand empirically. But we cannot deduce economic or genetic phenomenon. Mises failed
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:28:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735719274988199936
Reply addressees: @charlesmurray
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734206243963699200
IN REPLY TO:
@charlesmurray
Why even very smart economists (e.g. Deirdre McCloskey) must do their homework before holding forth on genetics. https://t.co/ToY644z7T3
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734206243963699200
Economics is a field where general rules of one niche do not apply to others. Same in evolutionary bio. Ergo deduction fails.
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:27:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735719027784355846
Reply addressees: @charlesmurray
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734206243963699200
IN REPLY TO:
@charlesmurray
Why even very smart economists (e.g. Deirdre McCloskey) must do their homework before holding forth on genetics. https://t.co/ToY644z7T3
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734206243963699200
What’s more unsettling is that the data says tweeters are in the upper 20%. (Return Ed. to Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric, History)
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:13:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735715372637159425
Reply addressees: @charlesmurray
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735428286428237825
IN REPLY TO:
@charlesmurray
The quality of the logic on Twitter makes it hard to believe the Flynn effect is real.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735428286428237825
What rhetorical technique or fallacy are you relying upon with that question? 😉
Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:02:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735712669919903744
Reply addressees: @thecoffeemonkey
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735472563556483072
IN REPLY TO:
@thecoffeemonkey
@curtdoolittle how can he be on the wrong side of something that hasn’t happened yet?
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735472563556483072