Episode 2: You're Not Wrong Walter, You're Just an A$$hole

In this episode, Yoel and Mickey tackle problems of tone and incivility in online discussions of the scientific literature. What constitutes bullying and is the term abused to derail legitimate criticism? What is an ad hominem attack and when is it a fallacy? Finally, who's our favorite member of the Black Goat podcast?Links:When the Revolution Came for Amy Cuddy - The New York TimesHere’s How Cornell Scientist Brian Wansink Turned Shoddy Data Into Viral Studies About How We EatSome Points On Bullying, Attacks and CriticismSimone Schnall's replication responseIssues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions | PNAS — Scientists are often protected by academic freedom, and in the United States, individuals are afforded First Amendment rights for free speech. However, freedoms are not immune to legal or social recourse, as in the case where a biotech chief executive officer was convicted of wire fraud for a misleading press release about a product (88). Individuals engaging in ad hominem attacks in scientific discourse should be subject to censure.No, we can't censure people for ad hominem attacks in scientific discourse. |Stop accusing me of ad hominem fallacies you stupid idiots | The Logic of SciencePsychMAPPsychMADSanjay's blogSimine's blogThe Black Goat – A podcast about doing scienceWheat — Side Launch Brewing CompanyGreat Lakes Brewery - Octopus Wants to Fight IPA