Re: [evol-psych] List with fresh(ish) eyes
- Thanks Hibbsa - valuable points and I share them exactly. I have to admit I've pretty much given up on the list already as I see almost no "science-minded" discussions appear anymore. I'm almost never one to start one either, haven't for more than a decade commented first on any publications other than to critizice it for sloppy methods or stupid hypotheses, so am not saying I'm any better. But since I've decided to keep out of anything that a) doesn't interest me b) turns into simpleminded quarrelling, I've had nothing to contribute in my own fields.I have become "angry" at the list since this new and growing phenomenon of ad hominen attacking really puts me off. As soon as some persons run out of real arguments (which seems to be very quickly in some cases), it all turns into a shouting match.That said, there are some wonderful, intelligent people here and they are the only reason I still am here after almost 20 years. I admire your energy and appreciate being allowed to have glimpses into your knowledge and thoughts.SussaOn Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 4:25 AM, hibbsa <hibbsa@...> wrote:
Hi ....I looked at the list today for the first time in a few weeks
(been away/busy), and I could be wrong but there seems to be a marked
relative decline in academic contributions (and contributors). I am not
myself an academic so obviously do value the openness of the list to the
views/questions/discussions of ordinary folk. But....at least for
me...the value of this list as opposed to a vast selection of other more
layperson lists, has been that opportunity to read the discussions (or
arguments) between academics in the field. Certainly a part of that is
also to read the sometimes or frequently interesting/relevant
contributions of other laypeople like myself. But - and again this is
just my personal preference which I guess I am stating because I imagine
a lot of other people share it - I kind of value those layperson
contributions when they occur within a context of a discussion that is,
by and large, dominated/led by academic folk.
I say I think other people will share the view. What I mean is, I
imagine there will be symbiosis between my preference and many other
stakeholders in this list. For example, academics....from their
perspective surely the attraction/value will be primarily the
opportunity to interact with other academics. For example, more junior
researchers might seek out a good list for the opportunity to get their
name in front of more senior, more influential academics. Or peers,
whether senior or junior, may seek a good list to carry on some friendly
or not so friendly disagreement. When it comes to interactions with
members of the public, laypersons and so on of various levels of ability
and sanity, from the perspective of academics this is probably very
welcome just so long as it remains mostly secondary, and mostly focussed
on the subjects the academics are throwing into the space.
In other words, academics probably want what I, and many others want
from the list. An environment that encourages academic/specialist
contributors, also open to members of the interested public.
Is this generally what other people envisage for this list? What does
Robert want? Are we layperson contributors aware that we may not be able
to have our cake and eat it. Meaning that, we can choose to collectively
dominate the list but if we do, academics will drift away and it just
becomes "another list" of which there are millions out there.
I mean...should there really be such a long running thread about
astrology? One answer to that would be, yes..if the discussion is about
the evolutionary psychology of psychology. Another answer would be, if
it isn't then no.
Just personal preferences. I of course accept it is not up to me and
hope no one takes any offense none which is intended.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
- Frankly, hibbsa, I don't understand how you can fail to appreciate the amazing spectacle of this list. A dry, 'intellectually safe' academic list, let alone some journal, is as deficient in psychological exemplars as a monoculture compared to an old-growth forest!
And free speech! Well, almost ... and how much do you see of THAT elsewhere?
So you don't get to read a brand new, breakthrough hypothesis here every day ... nor anywhere else either.
Don't step on the hose ;-)