In this project, we showed what ideas can get published. People can argue about whether that is a good thing or not. We do not have to convince the world that evidence-based epistemologies and consistent ethics work best before we can show whether they are valued in some fields.https://twitter.com/willwilkinson/status/1050075476021207040 …
-
-
I think you're not taking seriously enough that possibility that people (like me) agree with you very broadly about reason, science, liberalism, etc., but find your analysis so over-simplified, caricatured, and intellectually sloppy that it's ultimately counterproductive.
-
E.g., the idea that the "progressive left" is a uniform thing in the grip of "postmodernism," which "rejects objective truth," is just false. What epistemology generates this bad conclusion? Can't be very good!
-
Moreover, the idea that constructivist views are somehow anti-modernist is just bad intellectual history. Kant is a giant of Enlightenment, a modernist par excellence, and says we can't get out of own heads to the things themselves. But this is kid's stuff.
-
Agree w/ that much!
-
But truthfully, leftist philosophy has traditionally been based more on Hegel than Kant.
-
I think that's true. Kant opens the door for limiting plain old Reason and Hegel went berserk with dialectic and thence to Marx. The whole german tradition never really was excited about plain old Enlightnment reason.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Oh my goodness, “we can also show ppl who think they are already valued in grievance studies that they are not” That’s a bit of a show stopper
You guys sure know how to make friends!Thanks. 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.