- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
Vanessa has not only not read it, she doesn't understand it. I hope Phil dug in and bloodied her.
"a weird unvalidated scale no one has used before or since"
Gibberish from a person saying what they've heard other people say without knowing what the words mean.
Also, a BA in psych from a dinky New England private school? No, you're not getting out of this world's lamest appeal to authority because you're trying to claim they "thoroughly teach reading/critiquing psych papers" when you show a complete inability to read papers almost daily.
First, notice EVAN's very manly pearl clutching over Jesse insulting a shitty writer on Twitter in a way that's not remotely defamatory.
Then we have the claim that the "trans community" is expert in its knowledge. Even if this were true it would not refute Singal's criticism because communities are not real and do not make statements, only individuals do. It is impossible to cite a community and beyond that it would be wrong to do so without empirical confirmation that it is the communities actual position. For the group they mention this is possible because the group likely actively takes stances as a group, it would be wrong to say the "group community" takes those stances because they are a group and other groups have not refuted that they are a group. We can with the trans community very quickly show that the community is not at all in anything resembling lockstep on very fundamental essential claims like the nature of gender, transmedicalism, etc. It is beyond simple for me to pose questions to a member of the community that would very quickly lead to other members of the community attacking them for their answers which we can take as a form of disputing that those are the community's positions on the subject.
Jesse is bypassing the unspoken argument since it is stupid:
P1. The trans community is expert.
P2. I am in the trans community.
C1. I am expert.
The claim has a superficial viability to it but it is effectively meaningless because the "trans community" cannot speak. As a result it becomes merely a negative weapon to attack outsiders for not having insider approval. This is natural group dynamics and would be generally irrelevant to mention except that we are purporting to be engaged in a scientific enterprise here. Outside verification is a mandatory part of that, limiting it to insiders who by the nature of being insiders will not allow any falsification to occur is just Lysenkoism.
It's also important to notice that this shifts the entire focus from the actual arguments which are falsified or not to the speaker's group status. Arguments can be evaluated independent of the speaker, a claim to group status cannot. All focus would be on whether or not the claim or argument is coming from the trans community or not with none on whether it is true or false. (This is core to the proper objection to "lived experience" nonsense, that it renders knowledge impossible and/or irrelevant.)
Last edited:
