Kyle Thomas

3.1K posts

Kyle Thomas banner
Kyle Thomas

Kyle Thomas

@surfkt

Tweet about Social Science + Tech + Philosophy. Building Bell Labs of Social Science: social science on online data. Chief Scientist at MotiveMetrics.

Bay area Katılım Ekim 2009
3.3K Takip Edilen929 Takipçiler
Kyle Thomas retweetledi
Dan Williams
Dan Williams@danwilliamsphil·
New post! Drawing on a wide range of sources, evidence, and arguments, I argue for a social model of motivated reasoning. Put simply, the primary reason we convince ourselves of falsehoods in domains like politics, religion, and conspiracy theorising is not that we can’t handle the truth. It’s that holding accurate beliefs is often a losing move in social games involving advocacy, reputation management, and status competition. I also argue that the “you can’t handle the truth!” model of human psychology is not just mistaken; it is pernicious. It encourages the view that when people accept “harsh” beliefs that they don’t want to be true, they are being rational and truth-seeking—even heroic. In reality, people are often motivated to convince themselves of negative, pessimistic beliefs, and it often takes courage and intellectual virtue to confront positive truths. conspicuouscognition.com/p/wishful-thin…
Dan Williams tweet media
English
12
37
150
10.5K
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
Seems to me like safetyism is a significantly bigger X-risk for multiple reasons than what X-risk folks wring their hands about in their hypotheticals. I’m curious what @gmiller take on this is…
Tobias Huber@TobiasAHuber

@ByrneHobart and I just published "Against Safetyism" in @PirateWires — a new piece that makes the case that safetyism — and not climate change or artificial intelligence — has become one of the biggest existential risks facing humanity: piratewires.com/p/against-safe…

English
0
0
1
138
Kyle Thomas retweetledi
Tobias Huber
Tobias Huber@TobiasAHuber·
@ByrneHobart and I just published "Against Safetyism" in @PirateWires — a new piece that makes the case that safetyism — and not climate change or artificial intelligence — has become one of the biggest existential risks facing humanity: piratewires.com/p/against-safe…
English
22
58
320
135.5K
Aaron Lukaszewski
Aaron Lukaszewski@SpeciesTypical·
In sum, women’s bodily attractiveness is influenced by cues of (1) Residual Reproductive Value (small waist, perky breasts of any size) & (2) stored gluteofemoral fat (LCPUFAs) as a baby brain-building reproductive resource.  Questions? Drop them below.  I’ll tweet about men’s bodies another time. (Spoiler: Men’s bodily attractiveness all comes down to the form of the bellybutton.) 11/11
English
8
4
48
4.9K
Aaron Lukaszewski
Aaron Lukaszewski@SpeciesTypical·
What makes Sydney Sweeney’s body sexy enough to break the internet?  If you know about any finding from evolutionary psychology, it’s as likely as any to be that, when it comes to women’s bodily attractiveness, a low (~.60-.70) waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) is optimal, contributing to a voluptuous hourglass shape.  What you might not know about is the research that (1) sheds light on *why* low WHR is attractive, but also (2) challenges the centrality of WHR in defining women’s bodily attractiveness, (3) clarifies the (different) reproductive parameters indicated by waist size & hips size, respectively, & (4) tells us what, if anything, is going on with boobs.  Thread 🧵 1/11
Aaron Lukaszewski tweet mediaAaron Lukaszewski tweet media
English
8
27
210
82.9K
Alex Imas
Alex Imas@alexolegimas·
Experiments from ``small worlds" in behavioral econ can teach a lot about society. One of my favs is from Fehr et al,: to sustain cooperation in groups, it is necessary for strangers to be able and *willing* to punish antisocial behavior. The graphs from paper are striking 1/n
Alex Imas tweet mediaAlex Imas tweet media
English
4
33
243
20.6K
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
Love the focus on coordination and common knowledge but of course I’m biased.
English
0
0
1
45
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
@HSB_Lab Good to make this common knowledge here in addition to the email. Bravo.
English
0
1
6
213
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
@SeanPlusPlus @kevinrocci Loved tracking the whole thing through your tweets. I believe we both owe you $1.50 if my math is correct lolol
English
0
0
2
29
SeanPlusPlus
SeanPlusPlus@SeanPlusPlus·
Stage 21 - Wout!! Amazing Wout!! After his heroics in the Giro he comes here and single handedly saves the Tour for Visma. Chapeau 👏👏 Oh. And final results for @surfkt and @kevinrocci and me …
SeanPlusPlus tweet mediaSeanPlusPlus tweet media
English
2
0
2
88
SeanPlusPlus
SeanPlusPlus@SeanPlusPlus·
It's that time of year!! Fantasy TDF with my buddies @surfkt and @kevinrocci Allez Allez 🚴‍♂️🚴‍♂️
SeanPlusPlus tweet mediaSeanPlusPlus tweet media
English
1
0
5
844
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
This is great!
Eric Kaufmann@epkaufm

The Buckingham Manifesto for a Post-Progressive Social Science A growing recognition of the excesses of the cultural left has created an opening in contemporary intellectual life. This moment requires a new research agenda, a post-progressive movement in the social sciences and humanities. The ideals of progress and social justice had noble origins. By the 1960s, the exclusionary nature of western institutions, including universities, had become apparent. There was a need to overturn practices that had marginalized women and racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities. The left-wing movement that came to be known as progressivism played a vital role in rectifying this exclusion. Yet as it began to achieve its goals, it shifted to new ones: from equality of opportunity to equality of outcomes, from greater inclusiveness to a hypersensitivity to ever-more-elusive forms of emotional harm, from the opening of new perspectives to the enforcement of rigid orthodoxies. These shifts became institutionalized in policies such as racial and sexual preferences, mandatory diversity training, speech codes, and editorial policies that privilege the avoidance of perceived harm over scholarly and scientific rigour. And they were accompanied by a change in the norms of academic discourse, from vigorous debate to censorship, deplatforming, mobbing, and moralistic denunciation. The unfortunate result of this progressivist overreach has been a decline of trust in cultural and academic institutions and growing political polarization, including a populist backlash. These problems have prompted a rethink among many scholars. The challengers, who include conservatives, classical leftists and liberals, and eclectic pragmatists, retain the ideals of social progress, but yearn for a new glasnost—an intellectual openness—in the production and transmission of knowledge. Accordingly, a group of concerned scholars and writers recently met at the University of Buckingham to advance new thinking about the humanities and social sciences. We call for an intellectual agenda with two thrusts. Heterodox Social Science. Progressive dogmas have increasingly constricted the social sciences, including an obsession with race, gender, sexual orientation and identity, and an insistence that bias and oppression are the only acceptable explanations (to the exclusion of culture, history, and demographics). At the same time, deeper questions about human nature, and explanations that are consilient with the natural sciences, have been marginalized. We call for a new social science to free up inquiry, fill in blind spots, and render a richer and more accurate account of our social world. This does not require that every conceivable question be researched, only that those that are researched be treated with scientific objectivity and openness to multiple hypotheses. Critical Woke Studies. In the second two decades of the 21st century, academic and cultural institutions were suddenly seized by a radical ideology known as Critical Social Justice, Intersectionality, the Identity Synthesis, the Successor Ideology, or most commonly, Wokeness. This takeover took many by surprise and remains unexplained. We hold that the wokeness  revolution was not compelled by new discoveries or moral imperatives but is a contingent historical episode that needs to be studied, just as scholars have sought to explain the rise of nationalism, communism, neoliberalism, and populism. Many questions have already been raised. Is wokeness a unique development of the 2010s, or do its roots lie earlier, in the 1960s or 1970s? Is it a recurring historical phenomenon, appearing in many periods, or something new? Do people adopt it out of self-interest and status competition, or from true belief and quasi-religious conviction? Did it emerge spontaneously, or was it the goal of a campaign of deliberate infiltration? Was it downstream of law, or of culture? We call for a range of scholars and scientists, diverse in methods and viewpoints, to shed light on this consequential development. A post-progressive social science could be pursued in new universities and centres, among dissident scholars in the academic mainstream, in think tanks, or, best of all, in a future academia rededicated to open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and civil discourse. We hope that sympathetic scholars, publishers, editors, funders, and professional associations will join us in forging a new, intellectually and politically inclusive social science. Eric Kaufmann, University of Buckingham, conference organizer Jonathan Anomaly, researcher April Bleske-Rechek, University of Wisconsin Cory Clark, University of Pennsylvania Luke Conway, Grove City College Frank Furedi, University of Kent (Emeritus) Zach Goldberg, Florida State University Matthew Goodwin, University of Buckingham Jamin Haberstadt, University of Otago J.D. Haltigan, University of Buckingham Joshua Katz, American Enterprise Institute Lee Jussim, Rutgers University Lawrence Krauss, Origins Project Foundation Claire Lehmann, Quillette Magazine Robert Maranto, University of Arkansas Kevin McCaffree, University of North Texas and Theory and Society journal Richard McNally, Harvard University Francesca Minerva, Journal of Controversial Ideas Pamela Paresky, Harvard University Neema Parvini, University of Buckingham Lawrence Patihis, University of Portsmouth Zachary Patterson, Concordia University Steven Pinker, Harvard University Wilfred Reilly, Kentucky State University Christopher Rufo, Manhattan Institute Gad Saad, Concordia University Sally Satel, American Enterprise Institute Jukka Savolainen, Wayne State University Zvi Shalem, researcher Michael Shermer, Skeptic Magazine James Tooley, Vice Chancellor, University of Buckingham Jan van de Beek, University of Buckingham Colin Wright, Manhattan Institute Wesley Yang, writer Note: The above does not imply endorsement by an individual’s institution, apart from the University of Buckingham. To sign, go to link in next slide

English
0
0
2
78
Kyle Thomas retweetledi
Kelsey Piper
Kelsey Piper@KelseyTuoc·
Usually when I see someone saying something awful is capitalism they are describing something that 1) is genuinely awful 2) is a consequence of material scarcity and 3) has gotten much much less bad under capitalism
English
75
393
5.9K
204.1K
Kyle Thomas retweetledi
Crémieux
Crémieux@cremieuxrecueil·
My latest article is about a common concern for many young people today: Whether they should avoid having kids to help the climate. A new study suggests the answer is a firm "no"🧵 Go ahead and have those kids.
Crémieux tweet media
English
23
56
575
48.1K
Will
Will@Evolving_Moloch·
Popular theories in evo psych that I’m broadly skeptical of: snake detection, behavioral immune system (some universals re: disgust though), innate plant avoidance, gender equality paradox, mate preferences/beauty standards largely universal (with some caveats), overemphasis on mate choice. Things I agree with: there is a universal evolved psychology, psychology constrains/promotes culture, cognitive attractors/some aspects of ‘evoked culture’ (with caveats), some psychological sex differences (eg related to violence, caregiving).
English
17
7
160
11.6K
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
Someone needs to write a paper about how traveling used to be weird but now it’s WEIRD. Like going across many countries in b Europe 600 years ago must’ve been super weird. But now it’s normal for WEIRD folks.
English
0
0
1
68
Kyle Thomas
Kyle Thomas@surfkt·
I would love to see @HumBehEvoSoc host a debate on how ev psych fits into these issues around what one could broadly characterize as “DEI”. I could tag the counter side here but don’t want to put them on blast. I would happily be a part of the anti panel in the debate.
English
0
1
8
363
Kyle Thomas retweetledi
Ruxandra Teslo 🧬
Ruxandra Teslo 🧬@RuxandraTeslo·
Since when do science magazine editors get to decide which policies are acceptable and which aren’t (& with strong words like “permissible”) ? That’s the purview of politics. Their only job is to make sure that they publish high quality science.
Ruxandra Teslo 🧬 tweet media
English
14
33
460
184.6K