4 ms·

They should welcome online trolling, abuse, and personal attacks? Nobody should welcome it, but -- as it comes with the territory -- they need to ignore it

by mafribe 10y ago

They should welcome online trolling, abuse, and personal attacks? Nobody should welcome it, but -- as it comes with the territory -- they need to ignore it. She works on what is historically and cross-culturally arguably the most controversial subject, namely human sexuality. Attacks are to be expected, and the mature reaction to this is to lead by example: ignore the attacks and be as meticulously scientific as possible in the hope of inspiring others to be similarly mature. All the more so if you work in a field (psychology) that has a long history of unsupported claims and lack of methodological rigour. The reason science works, the reason we can fly to Mars, have a supercomputer in everybody's pocket today, can treat many diseases, is because sufficiently many adhere to a rigorous scientific methodology and every scientist is extremely critical of colleagues who don't. It is incumbent upon all scientists to hold themselves and others up to the highest standards. Computer science grew out of worries about the lack of rigor in the foundations of mathematics,triggered by the (re-)discovery of non-Euclidian geometry. Mathematics, the most rigorous of all scientific fields, is currently beginning to move towards formally verified proofs. To be even more reliable.

hackuser 10y ago
> it comes with the territory I disagree; that's an excuse for abusive, unproductive behavior. In many environments, people manage to criticize ideas respectfully and productively, even on social forums like HN. Abuse is counter-productive and completely unnecessary.
- mafribe 10y ago
  I disagree; What do you disagree with? The factual claim? It's not relevant that some manage to discuss sexuality respectfully and productively. Most can't, as of October 2016. Claims of scientific misconduct (in a general sense) ought to be taken seriously by scientists. There is nothing else to say. What alternative do you suggest? Somebody said mean things on Twitter, hence psychologists like Fiske should continue as before?
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > Claims of scientific misconduct (in a general sense) ought to be taken seriously by scientists. I disagree. Not all claims should be taken seriously; most should be ignored. Claims accompanied by abuse seriously and rightly damage their own credibility; if I see abuse anywhere, I just stop reading and move on. There are not nearly enough resources to address every random person's claim about every issue in the world. People don't read every book and website, address every conspiracy theory, or give time to every crackpot or amateur who wants to have a say. Google doesn't listen to every users' ideas about their software; the military doesn't listen to everyone's strategic recommendations; physicists don't listen to every person's theory of thermodynamics; the pilots of your airplane don't want your input on how to do their jobs. I have no interest in random people's ideas about IT; they have no idea what they are talking about. You need to demonstrate that you are worth their time by establishing credibility. It seems silly that because people have access to a platform that amplifies their voices, they think professionals will want to hear from them.
    - Kalium 10y ago
      When reasonable criticism by highly qualified statisticians is dismissed as terrorism, perhaps it is possible that abusive behavior by critics is not the issue at hand.

by mafribe 10y ago

hackuser 10y ago

> it comes with the territory I disagree; that's an excuse for abusive, unproductive behavior. In many environments, people manage to criticize ideas respectfully and productively, even on social forums like HN. Abuse is counter-productive and completely unnecessary.

mafribe 10y ago
I disagree; What do you disagree with? The factual claim? It's not relevant that some manage to discuss sexuality respectfully and productively. Most can't, as of October 2016. Claims of scientific misconduct (in a general sense) ought to be taken seriously by scientists. There is nothing else to say. What alternative do you suggest? Somebody said mean things on Twitter, hence psychologists like Fiske should continue as before?
- hackuser 10y ago
  > Claims of scientific misconduct (in a general sense) ought to be taken seriously by scientists. I disagree. Not all claims should be taken seriously; most should be ignored. Claims accompanied by abuse seriously and rightly damage their own credibility; if I see abuse anywhere, I just stop reading and move on. There are not nearly enough resources to address every random person's claim about every issue in the world. People don't read every book and website, address every conspiracy theory, or give time to every crackpot or amateur who wants to have a say. Google doesn't listen to every users' ideas about their software; the military doesn't listen to everyone's strategic recommendations; physicists don't listen to every person's theory of thermodynamics; the pilots of your airplane don't want your input on how to do their jobs. I have no interest in random people's ideas about IT; they have no idea what they are talking about. You need to demonstrate that you are worth their time by establishing credibility. It seems silly that because people have access to a platform that amplifies their voices, they think professionals will want to hear from them.
  - Kalium 10y ago
    When reasonable criticism by highly qualified statisticians is dismissed as terrorism, perhaps it is possible that abusive behavior by critics is not the issue at hand.