Arpan Gangopadhyay

Nerd who doesn't know shit

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

The audacity of Uber to send me notifications when I owe them 15 rupees for no reason at all

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati And im an engineer. Just a rare variety in this country that isn't disillusioned from the importance of research in non stem subjects and an ego too high to learn said importance and awesome well of knowledge humanity has accumulated in the soft sciences

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati I literally used a made up word that you can understand and then you don't know what proxies are. I mean you're not really helping your case here. How about you give me a comprehensive set of words you can understand

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati They do actually. Do you not know about the topics your analogies depend on? BB is high volume hypertrophic training and PL is low rep, max strength neuromuscular stimulus training.

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati It's the second time I brought it up, that too to clear up your misconception that science folks have dibs on that concept. I'll humour you with your example. While BB is more subjective, it has to cross an objective threshold. Which neither one of us will be able to cross lmao

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati To resort to fiction after all the holier than thou act about evidence lmfaooo.

If you're doing science to prove people wrong instead of curiosity, maybe try a different subject? And averseness? False contrast much? As if hasty generalization and straw man wasn't enough

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati The theories are pretty helpful, but historically people are too busy to realized that they enabled a fascist police state
Congratulations, its 1859, you disproved newtons laws based on mercurys perihelion precession, now dump it

Time machines? Really? Why are you this triggered

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Meanwhile your biggest complaint is that you're not treated like a god because the umbrella under which your one subject of interest lies has easier "developability" of experimental proxies for testing

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Nop My biggest complaint is that those dudes nitpick history to satiate to their own beliefs that can't be altered by evidence to appease religious folks by "confirming" the validity and superiority of their religious books. It's not a new phenomenon

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati It's really not. I was giving an argument in the context of the post where the three dudes were called "historians"

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati It's a different subject boi. The same way football skills aren't exactly transferable to cricket. And the amount of evidence they rack up for a theory is proof that they don't have issues with corr=cause thing. It's just an insufficient evidence problem when they are wrong.

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Yea rerunning the French revolution,the revolt of 1857 are real options. And naturally people do get things wrong but that is less so because of a so called wiggle room and more so because of the exact reason the scientists I mentioned earlier "got away" with incorrectness.

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Yeah so it's the same as trying to explain to a hs dropout why Ramanujan's calculation of 1+2+...=-1/12 is wrong or how hard it was for statisticians to convince people that corr is not causation. It doesn't work as an argument against someone without the conceptual toolkit

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Again. Interpretation being the key word. Subaltern, Liberal, etc. And it's not blasphemy because it happens all the time between the schools of thought. It's a different subject which requires different training to understand well. History is reconstruction from messy evidence

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Well since we are in the blatantly wrong and still be revered territory. Einstein rejected quantum randomness, Braun and Lichtenfels opposed Semmelweis. Kelvin had the wrong age of earth. But they advanced the Frameworks of study greatly

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati And its quite a jump to land on the conclusion STEM >> arts.
The opinion is based around conditioning as a kid of well educated Indians.

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati That's kinda the point of history. To have interpretations on the diff evidence that seem in conflict with each other
If anything, the constraint of accurate measurement of scientific proxies is what makes research categorically less tricky for progress by rolling in that logic

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Which makes it more than essential that people be trained in history and how to interpret it using the existing frameworks. STEM being superior is just a fever dream.

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati Tru but doctors used to measure miasma before germ theory; theyd still give you the best shot at life. And history isn't falsifiable? history is challenged every day on the plausibility of it containing bias of the Victor. But otn why do you look down on history so much over STEM

[Arpan Gangopadhyay @CybArpan]

@chennaipayyann @2Gaudadhipati I think you've just fallen for an intellectual reductionism of a technocratic fantasy. STEM might be harder to get into as a professional but treating only the measurable as real is showing of a lack of rigor.