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.
This is the worst possible time to be claiming that things are true when we mean that they are narratives which resonate emotionally with us.https://areomagazine.com/2017/12/08/the-problem-with-truth-and-reason-in-a-post-truth-society/ …
-
-
Seems like symantics here more than anything (am aware of epistemological debates, admire your insistence on drawing a line there given the dangers.) At the same time I might still call Hamlet “true”, in a human nature, “spiritual” sense. Think most get the distinction.
-
You do recognize the limits of rationality explicitly, wonder how you reconcile having so much faith in it as the grail. I still agree it's critical and a top tier value, but what beyond "the rational." The rational can't tell you "good" or "bad", only inform it.
-
Can see it your way, the "post-truth" idea is terrible and scary. Need better recognition of facts. That's worth concern. The concern from the flip-side is the simple question are there limits to the utility of reason, areas where it is impotent? I think so, balance is reqd.
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.