4 ms·

Except that's not at all what Doctor means, not even remotely. Doctor has a specific meaning, and it's understood to mean a set of credentials. If you don't hav

by icepat 4y ago

Except that's not at all what Doctor means, not even remotely. Doctor has a specific meaning, and it's understood to mean a set of credentials. If you don't have it, but say you do, you're lying. It's absolutely relevant. If someone is claiming to have credentials they don't have, then they're untrustworthy.

carapace 4y ago
If I promise never to call him "Doctor" again will you look through the referenced papers with me? I just woke up, I've got my coffee, and I'm ready to go... - - - - Gatekeeping the term "Doctor" is uninteresting, and it doesn't make your side of the argument look good. You have nothing stronger to dun him on? If you really want to focus on character assassination rather than truth and science, well here you go: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-01-29-mn-26470-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-01-29-mn-26470-... Have fun. I'll be busy reading papers. You know where to find me if you change your mind.
- icepat 4y ago
  > Gatekeeping the term "Doctor" is uninteresting, and it doesn't make your side of the argument look good. You have nothing stronger to dun him on? I think the fact that he's claiming to have credentials that he does not is pretty damning. You have this utterly backwards. If I claim to have founded something groundbreaking, and it turns out I lied about my credentials, that casts doubt on everything I've done.
  - carapace 4y ago
    So he calls himself "Dr." but he doesn't have a PhD. I get it. So terrible. Much deceptive. Wow. Do you want to discuss some scientific studies or not?
    - icepat 4y ago
      Not if you're going to sarcastically dismiss valid points that discredit what you're talking about like this.
      - carapace 4y ago
        So if I'm not completely respectful and I don't admit defeat before even we begin you're unwilling to examine the scientific evidence?
        icepat 4y ago
        Given the continued sarcasm, I'll take that as a no. I'll also point you over to these: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Edit out swipes.
        carapace 4y ago
        I'm sorry. I had no idea Doge Meme would offend you so much. Please accept my apology. - - - - I've had a chance to look over the papers discussed in the meta-study you cited. I think you should look them over too, you might want to "adjust your priors" as they say in Bayesian modelling. The evidence really doesn't support your position. Like I said above, Skeptics perform an important and valuable function in the intellectual life of man. James Randi has done a lot of good and important work, for example. However, in this case, it's clear to me that the Skeptics have erroneously identified NLP et. al. as "woo-woo". It's truly unfortunate. In any event, thank you for prompting me to actually go look at the papers. It was kind of a waste of time (for me at least) but at least now I know (to my own satisfaction) what went wrong in the scientific study of NLP. One day we'll do proper science to it. I look forward to that day. - - - - "See ya space cowboy."

by icepat 4y ago

carapace 4y ago

If I promise never to call him "Doctor" again will you look through the referenced papers with me? I just woke up, I've got my coffee, and I'm ready to go... - - - - Gatekeeping the term "Doctor" is uninteresting, and it doesn't make your side of the argument look good. You have nothing stronger to dun him on? If you really want to focus on character assassination rather than truth and science, well here you go: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-01-29-mn-26470-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-01-29-mn-26470-... Have fun. I'll be busy reading papers. You know where to find me if you change your mind.

icepat 4y ago
> Gatekeeping the term "Doctor" is uninteresting, and it doesn't make your side of the argument look good. You have nothing stronger to dun him on? I think the fact that he's claiming to have credentials that he does not is pretty damning. You have this utterly backwards. If I claim to have founded something groundbreaking, and it turns out I lied about my credentials, that casts doubt on everything I've done.
- carapace 4y ago
  So he calls himself "Dr." but he doesn't have a PhD. I get it. So terrible. Much deceptive. Wow. Do you want to discuss some scientific studies or not?
  - icepat 4y ago
    Not if you're going to sarcastically dismiss valid points that discredit what you're talking about like this.
    - carapace 4y ago
      So if I'm not completely respectful and I don't admit defeat before even we begin you're unwilling to examine the scientific evidence?
      - icepat 4y ago
        Given the continued sarcasm, I'll take that as a no. I'll also point you over to these: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Edit out swipes.
        carapace 4y ago
        I'm sorry. I had no idea Doge Meme would offend you so much. Please accept my apology. - - - - I've had a chance to look over the papers discussed in the meta-study you cited. I think you should look them over too, you might want to "adjust your priors" as they say in Bayesian modelling. The evidence really doesn't support your position. Like I said above, Skeptics perform an important and valuable function in the intellectual life of man. James Randi has done a lot of good and important work, for example. However, in this case, it's clear to me that the Skeptics have erroneously identified NLP et. al. as "woo-woo". It's truly unfortunate. In any event, thank you for prompting me to actually go look at the papers. It was kind of a waste of time (for me at least) but at least now I know (to my own satisfaction) what went wrong in the scientific study of NLP. One day we'll do proper science to it. I look forward to that day. - - - - "See ya space cowboy."