I don’t know about you, but I’m becoming heartily sick of being told the obvious nonsense that “myths” are just as valid an approach to the truth as science, just different. No they aren’t. If there were a better way of getting to the truth, science would adopt it.
-
-
Meh, he may not be expressing that right, he's def problematically loose at times, and that's worth criticism. But he is a science dude not a science denier, least the stuff I've seen. He tries to augment, or tie the myths to evolutionary psych, big 5 etc.
-
He has a Darwinian notion of truth and would like the return of some metanarratives which he describes as 'the reality of the mythic world'. An affective reality superceding an objective one. Feelings and facts. He's consistent on this.
-
Well, maybe I just don't know his takes well enough (like him but not an ardent fan), but that's not anywhere anything near primary I'd take from him, but again I haven't listened or read Maps of Meaning or anything at that level.
-
Would be curious if Peterson would cosign what you just wrote there, that seems relevant.
-
Well, yes. If he doesn't, I'm criticising something which doesn't exist. He does tho. The mythic world, pragmatic notions of truth are consistent & explicit. This is at the root of the difference skeptics/rationalists have with him - epistemology, how we know what is true.
-
If you asked him that question above though I'm not positive he would say what you are saying, which I know is what you've taken from his books. I get the epistemology thing, I'm just pretty inclined to think it's a communication rather than philosophical/epistemological issue
-
You should definitely check rather than taking my word for it. You will find an epistemological difference tho. Rogan hoped that it was a communication difference which could be resolved only to find Peterson adamant on defining truth pragmatically rather than by evidence.
-
That isn't a strawman or a misrepresentation of his position tho I understand why you'd suspect this because that happens to him a lot. He really does argue for this being a better way to define truth consistently & his supporters who are familiar with this defend it too.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.