I don't think most people do denigrate an entire field tho. I addressed that here in the section about accusations of reductionism.https://areomagazine.com/2018/02/07/no-postmodernism-is-not-dead-and-other-misconceptions/ …
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @SOhawkins21 and
No-one is criticising postmodern architecture because it doesn't matter. It is a few key ideas which have evolved through successive waves of critical theory, entered activism trading on the good name of feminism, civil rights movement etc & impacted mainstream social conscience.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @gorskon and
Oh, I was referring to the IDW. Virtually everyone named in that NYT article (and New Atheism by extension), have been critical of POMO in one form or another. Generally speaking you may be correct.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
They are a mixed bunch but I think the New Atheists are much more likely to be critical of it for valid reasons - epistemology, rather than the 'Neo-Marxism' cobblers, but then these are my people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The diversity of thought it’s evident, especially of you read the NYT article. But that doesn’t negate the idea that most of them have been explicitly against POMO. I know Harris, Peterson, & virtually every scientist in that group is.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Helen Pluckrose Retweeted Helen Pluckrose
I don't disagree with you about that. I just think they have different reasons for being so and that matters. Peterson & Harris don't have the same problem with it. eg,https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/917921688381263877 …
Helen Pluckrose added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @SOhawkins21 and
And Peterson is a Jungian psychologist. If that is a scientist, it is a very different kind to a neuroscientist.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
That’s fair. Would you say that Harris reasons is epistemological (which I’m sympathetic to) and Peterson’s is (political)?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes, very much so. Harris' epistemology is Newtonian and Peterson's is Darwinian. Because the latter is pragmatic, it has much more in common with the kind of motivated reasoning found in the branches of activism he criticises.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I thought with Peterson, the main political issue (outside of free speech) was about feminism (the idea that sex/gender essentialism in non-existent)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, but because both feminist social constructivism and Peterson's narrative constructivism are pragmatic, they both seek to find what suits their narratives & explain it with overarching, moralistic metanarratives.
-
-
That is spot certainly spot on
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.