Why are transgender people immune to optical illusions? (2017)

Jeez, the comments here. I feel compelled to point out that the very first line of the linked article is

>[Epistemic status: So, so speculative. Don’t take any of this seriously until it’s replicated and endorsed by other people.]

There's a difference between poorly supported and wrong, and the whole point of having a blog (as opposed to writing papers) is to throw out half-baked ideas and observations that inspire rigorous action.

"Dissociation is a vague psychiatric symptom where you feel like you’re not real, or the world isn’t real, or you’re detached from the world, or something like that. It sounds weird, but if you explain it to someone who’s had it, they’ll say “Oh yeah, that thing!” It’s usually unpleasant, and tends to occur in PTSD, borderline personality, and extreme stress."

That really spoke to me. I have very bad allergies and as the doctor was trying things to help me out I spent about 3 months on Singulair. I had severe disassociation. It was very unpleasant and I stopped it. But yeah, that thing.

"I wanted to replicate this result myself. So a few months ago, when I surveyed readers of my blog, I included some questions about perceptual illusions (including a static version of the hollow mask). I got five thousand responses, including a few from schizophrenic and autistic readers. Sure enough, the effect was there."

Self-selection, numerous predictors, 5% threshold, no correction for multiple tests etc.

Edit for the down-voters: these problems turn the whole thing into a useless exercise. Forget about it.

better question: why do self-described rationalists breathlessly report anything with the word "transgender" in it while discarding any pretense to rigour?

No, wait. That headline isn't breathless enough.

Better:

Why are cis people immune to science?

Ah, le môt juste!

- signed, a trans woman

So, didn't really pay attention to the article, but wow, that spinning mask[0] in interesting!

Somehow, the effect doesn't work looking at only the forehead[1] which I would have assumed means because my brain doesn't recognize it as a "face". However, the effect does work for me still only looking at the neck[2] which I can't explain other than something with the shading?

Cool stuff!

[0] https://i1.wp.com/slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/spinning_ma...

[1] https://www.dropbox.com/s/io9nsrpp52waxq5/spinning_mask_uppe...

[2] https://www.dropbox.com/s/te0s3wgf6rilf4a/spinning_mask_lowe...

lol the first couple of comments on that page say everything needed about this "study"

> sflicht says: > June 28, 2017 at 10:29 pm ~new~ > So I assume you’ll write up your results for publication? It would be a shame if not. I understand you’re busy but… science?

> registrationisdumb says: > June 28, 2017 at 10:52 pm ~new~ > None of Scott’s surveys are properly randomized trials and draw from a very unique userbase, which makes me hesitant that any of them should be published before replicated in a proper trial.