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.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @SOhawkins21 and
And science simply is the best method we have for establishing what is (provisionally) true. I'm not very interested in it and way more so in politics and culture but it is the best skeptical, critical method going.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @gorskon and
Sure, I think science should be valued and accepted. But it’s one form of inquiry that we have and it’s very important. That said, science can’t and shouldn’t solve every issue. There is such a thing as scientism and scientific overreach.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Do many people claim science can solve every issue. Surely, it just tells us what is true on various, factual levels and is more likely to be right than other methods. Evidence-based knowledge over standpoint theory, for example.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Scientism has occurred in the past and I think it re-emerged with the advent of new atheism. Every great thing you have to say about science is something I’ll agree with (just look at my bio). But I’m also someone who questions everything before accepting it as fact.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't agree about the New Atheists but I do think questioning everything and accepting that knowledge is always provisional and making efforts to disprove things we thought were true are central to science.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @SOhawkins21 and
I wrote this in response to a defence of postmodernism. https://areomagazine.com/2018/04/28/skepticism-is-necessary-in-our-post-truth-age-postmodernism-is-not/ … Includes this quote from Sokal & Bricmont which I think sets out the difference between the specific skepticism of science and the radical skepticism of PoMo.pic.twitter.com/upVGdsEKr8
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
That’s a great paragraph, and pretty spot on. One reason why I like philosophy is because of its capacity to question and get to the root of things. What I gain from your paragraph is don’t embrace scientism, but don’t plunge into the abyss either
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I always reserve judgement when someone mentions philosophy. What follows can be a rigorous and logical argument seeking to clarify complex issues or complete fluffy woo made deliberately obscure. I think I might like your approach to it. Scientism is anti-science.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yeah, that’s completely understandable. Dennett himself has said philosophy is needed to protect from scientific overreach. Plus, life is vast. Not everything is going to be reduced to tabulations, test tubes, and MRI scans.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No, we need people to be doing that stuff properly so we can call on it in to inform ethics & policy etc. I am interested in ideology & culture. Previously, late medieval & early modern but I've been stuck in the present for a while now.
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.