I don't think so. It can be true that some things are found meaningful, obv. But those things may or may not be based in truth. There are right & wrong answers to things. A truth claim is true, false, partially true or unknown. https://twitter.com/ComplaintStick/status/1000871751218221056 …
Is there a prior to the invention of science? Humans have been testing things and using the evidence provided for as long as we existed. 'Scire' - to know as a fact. However, we can also apply science to very old data. Not sure what the relevance of this tweet is.
-
-
It doesn't matter much whether there was a word for making a decision based on evidence - I won't eat that because it makes people sick - or based on myth - I won't eat that because God says it is unclean, truth claims are involved. The former cld be true. The latter unlikely.
-
OK so there's a myth one of whose lessons is: don't eat this thing because you will become sick. Is that myth telling you something meaningful or something true?
-
We could not know if it was true without testing it. For the Hare Krishnas it is onions and garlic. For the ancient Hebrews, it was pork & shellfish. The former seems groundless. The latter can now be understood in relation to food poisoning & dealt with via refrigeration.
-
People may or may not find dietary restrictions meaningful and this could relate to where they fall on the moral foundations - if they have strong sanctity/degradation intuitions, they could be more inclined to favor these rules regardless of evidence.
End of conversation
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.