Twitter | Search | |
Lee Jussim
Social science&science reform, viewpoint diversity, principled defense of free inquiry, disciplined skepticism.
33,297
Tweets
720
Following
18,102
Followers
Tweets
Lee Jussim 1m
Ties for winning my tw for the day, with , a response to a thread that showed that biologists study races of aphids
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 4h
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 4h
Its tough for me to do that because I am *in* academia. But I value the effort, actually. From The Orwelexicon coming soon to a bright-yet-dimly-lit aracnid-dwelling-adjacent place near you:
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Replying to @DanFriedman81
The socially constructed view clearly has quite a lot of truth to it for human "races." owever, most biotypes I know don't care a lot about terminology for human group diffs. "Geographical origin of ancestors" is fine for most, I think. But then we're on the euphemism treadmill.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Hint: Think. Then: 1. Think about what thinking is. 2. Attach it to the background of the photo. 3. Follow that by the 1 word you would to describe that arachnid's domicile.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Sure. He & I have a couple of papers together. But the most articulate serious climate skeptic I know is . Over 100 peer reviewed papers; no histrionic claims; accepts warming & human causes.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Nope. Coming soon to:
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Replying to @blancmarc20
Wins my twitter for the day, god that is good.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Replying to @taylorgrayson
Again, you need to distinguish whether we are talking about "race" as a bio construct, or human "races" specifically. Those are not the same convo. Grasshoppers have antennas. Humans don't. That does not mean "antennas are not a bio construct."
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 5h
Replying to @DanFriedman81
Human races. For sure. And, in a trivial sense, everything is social constructed (bc they are all human-created concepts). But: 1. race is not biologically restriced to humans 2. something can be social constructed around some external reality.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @TheUKDemocrat
Caveat emptor? Sure. But if we expect W to lean left, and it provides counter-left evidence, that should actually increase its credibility. In law, I think this is enshrined as giving extra credibility to people who testify against their own self-interest (something like that).
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @haug_carey
From The Orwelexicon:
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
How can you tell? Wildly overstated claims that serve to advance a political agenda (and it matters not at all whether you or I support that agenda). END. From The Orwelexicon:
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
So, nothing here should lead you to believe "there is biological reality to human races." Nothing here made that point. But, perhaps, something here did allow you to call political ax-grinding masquerading as science.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
1 of my kids once predicted snow would close the schools the next day. I asked her why she thought that. She said, "Because I do not want to go school tomorrow." The snows came and school was, in fact, closed.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
Of course, just because someone grinds a political ax does not mean they are wrong. They can believe something true for the wrong reasons.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
Strong signal that what is going on is equalitarian or ideological ax-grinding is: 1. A failure to (absence of) defining what a biological race is 2. Declaring there are no human races. You cannot possibly make that declaration without first defining biological race.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
To empirically establish some truth (eg, whether or not there are biological human races), you need to first: 1. define and establish what a biological race is. 2. show that, by your definition, humans do not fit.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
You do not "win" an argument by defining away your opposition. You do not empirically establish the truth of some proposition (eg, "there is no biological reality to human races") by simply defining away the problem.
Reply Retweet Like
Lee Jussim 6h
Replying to @PsychRabble
"But no one else has to buy your definition. In this particular case, there are obviously plenty of biologists, geneticists and scientists who productively use the concept of "race" in their research."
Reply Retweet Like