This is just a confusion in terms: "Science" = process by which humans examine the universe "Facts" = truths about the universe that cannot be altered Science is by definition constructed. Facts are nothttps://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1368259842222268421 …
-
-
I'm not convinced that some people don't genuinely believe that there is no such thing as objective reality. But in any case, whether you believe it doesn't exist or simply can't be known, both lead to absurdity.
-
Some people may believe pretty much every ludicrous idea, but it's not the main argument. But I think it's pretty much a given that our system for analyzing the world is socially constructed, regardless of the reality we're trying to assess
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Postmodernists use this idea to justify acting like there is no criteria that let us evaluate which ideas are more objective than others.
-
They may say they are agnostics because it look more respectable, but they end up acting like atheists. (only using agnostic/atheists as an image, I don’t believe that objective true mean God)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We can't even known that there is something like that, but it's not a problem from a scientific POV. To be clearer, scientific method is consistent with the inexistence of a lot of "objective reality" kind of things, and that doesn't pose a problem from an epistemological POV.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is the phrase "objective reality" identicaly to "reality exists"? I don't think it is. Social constructivism doesn't doubt that reality exists, just that an objective reality exists. Important distinction, no?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.