Peter Steidinger

psteidinger.bsky.social

14 July 2026 18:49

Fand ich mit Abstand den schlechtesten Text, den ich in letzter Zeit gelesen habe. Er agiert nur mit ein paar Buzzwords, bedient Ideologien, aber sicher keine wirklichen Konzepte, produziert nichts weiter als heisse Luft. Pädagogik-Quacksalberei.

Daniel Lakens

lakens.bsky.social

20 May 2026 13:42

I now also read this paper. It is a basic summary of Poppers work I agree with, but treating our paper as an example of an inductive approach would require actively misrepresenting what we state. So I really fail to see your point here. Unless there is any stronger argument from your side.

Daniel Lakens

lakens.bsky.social

20 May 2026 13:40

Do the typical scholarly thing: rephrase our point in the strongest way possible, explain where you agree, then say where we are wrong, and point out what is needed to improve the sentence. I am happy to replace a few words.

Daniel Lakens

lakens.bsky.social

20 May 2026 13:40

You have picked out a single sentence and made some point about it. I never find this useful. If this is not semantics, you can tie it back to main points in the paper. As you have not done this, it is difficult to engage meaningfully with your message.

Daniel Lakens

lakens.bsky.social

20 May 2026 13:40

Maybe you can rephrase the sentence so it is correct. That will clarify the extent of your criticism. If it is semantics, as I expect, or something we need to think about.