4 ms·
> But saying "they couldn't replicate it because they're idiots, therefore it's replicable" is not a rebuttal, just bullying. > It's not a value judgement, jus
by xpe 2y ago
> But saying "they couldn't replicate it because they're idiots, therefore it's replicable" is not a rebuttal, just bullying.
> It's not a value judgement, just doesn't help his case at all.
Calling it "bullying" looks like a value judgment to me. Am I missing something?
To me, Dean's response is quite sensible, particularly given his claims the other papers made serious mistakes and have potential conflicts of interest.
- twothreeone 2y agoI'm not saying "Bullying is bad and bullies are bad people", that would be a value judgement. I'm saying bullying is the strictly worse strategy for strengthening his paper's claims in this scenario. The better strategy would be to foster an environment in which people can easily replicate your claims.
- xpe 2y agoI think for most people the word “bullying” has a value judgment built-in.
- xpe 2y agoIn a perfect world, making a paper easier to replicate has advantages, sure. (But it also has costs.) Second, even a healthy environment can be undermined by lack of skills or resources, intellectual dishonesty, or conflicts of interest.
- xpe 2y agoAre you suggesting Dean take a different approach in his response? Are you saying it was already too late given the environment? (I’m also not sure I know what you mean by environment here.)