I think this might be it. Currently dealing with (but now ignoring) someone who claims one cannot consistently support nondiscrimination by gender, race & sexuality AND evidence based epistemology coz of evidence that we can't treat men & women the same re: reproductive health.https://twitter.com/ArthurCDent/status/1053772614823424000 …
-
-
It means we can't teach the fluffy thinkers to find logical reasoning and evidence-based epistemology satisfying and they cannot teach us to value spiritual/affective/mythical/metaphysical notions of truth. We just have to glare at each other and mutter darkly.
Show this thread -
Of course, many people manage to do both. I see this most strongly in some believing Jewish friends whose working lives require strong skills of analytical reasoning but then they take a hiatus at least once a week to be all spiritual and fluffy. Tut on them. "Tut," I say.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You’re aware of the psychological preference for analytical versus intuitive reasoning? Sounds like what you’re describing. Strong findings - eg predicts being religious, into alternative medicine, magical beliefs about gambling.
-
I am but have done almost no reading on this. I should.
-
It’s solid stuff. Will certainly help you understand why nebulous fuzzy thinking is so offensive to you but not to others :)
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.