8 ms·
It's a strange world we live in. This critique of a critique is valid, and pointing out the stunt nature of the Hitler comparison is entirely reasonable. And ye
by tacitusarc 6y ago
It's a strange world we live in. This critique of a critique is valid, and pointing out the stunt nature of the Hitler comparison is entirely reasonable. And yet... and yet I can't help but feel that the entire discipline within which their paper was accepted remains farcical. Putting jargon into any generic template, written by Hitler or anyone else, should not result in a publishable paper. That is a huge red flag when it comes to the validity of the discipline.
- nicklecompte 6y agoThe article also points out that similar fraud occurs in the natural sciences (it is worryingly easy to falsify experimental data, assuming nobody is looking too closely). But even those who are deeply critical of contemporary practices in natural science research don’t discredit the entire discipline. Being able to slip some garbage papers into some journals by itself really doesn’t prove anything about a specific discipline, at least not without a comparative analysis of published fraudulent papers (between, say, sociology and physics) that AFAIK doesn’t exist. You could follow your logic to claim that all disciplines have a validity problem... but then what is the point of the observation, other than that human reasoning is imperfect?