Often people tell me I shld put aside my differences with some1 because we are on the same side & the smaller differences shld be tolerated
-
-
I've not really understood the disagreement some seem to have with
@jordanbpeterson -
Same epistemological problem we have with PoMos. Denial of objective truth/knowledge which is obtained by evidence.
-
OK? He seems to be on the other side of that equation... Do you have an example?
-
He believes things are true if they are useful. He's a pragmatist. If believing that 2+2=5 gave humans an advantage, it'd be true. egpic.twitter.com/UtMZLiQYkq
-
I think you'll find he's using a different definition of 'truth.' Metaphor or wisdom as opposed to hard facts.
-
Yes, exactly. A subjective truth. Much like the PoMos. And he prioritises this & brings it into discussion of literal truth. Like Pomos.
-
eg, see Sokal & Bricmont criticising this idea. They're talking abt PoMos but they could just as easily be talking abt Petersonpic.twitter.com/uExswKHPUT
-
This doesn't sound like him at all. Have you spoken to him?
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
He would just disagree with you about God. I tend to be more in his boat there as well. You certainly aren't disappointing me.
-
:) I won't fall out with God-believers generally. But I do think it matters what is true & how we know what is true. A lot.
-
And coz we differ profoundly there & I think it's essential to seeing & countering the problems with PoMo & he's hugely influential there...
-
I see his thinking as a problem. But I support him on free speech. We're not pursuing the same primary goals tho. Some secondary ones.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
JP would agree with "Enlightenment liberalism w/ its emphasis on freedom, equal opportunities, individuality, science, reason &evidence" 1/2
-
No. He doesn't believe in objective knowledge and truth. He believes in subjective knowledge but judges truth on what makes us survive.pic.twitter.com/NNEt8ItB3t
-
Ill give you that his definition is bad. He does believe in objective truth. As well as subjective truths that are better defined as wisdom.
-
But not objective truth in the sense of truth that exists outside humanity & is true whether anyone believes it & is benefited by believing
-
If believing 2 + 2 = 5 helped humanity survive & procreate, he's say it was true rather than a false belief which benefited humanity.
-
But I have argued too much about this & am sick of it. I don't disown anyone for finding worth in his ideas. I just disagree. :) Must sleep.
-
All I wanna say is that Sam Harris interview is his worst moment. He mostly just wants epistemological room for mushroom trips.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I don't agree with all of his views, but I think he presents a powerful & inspiring counter-narrative to postmodernism, hence his appeal
-
I do too but unfortunately, he's only opposing half of it coz the other half applies to him too. Makes it harder to counter.pic.twitter.com/XjwgfRiFMw
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.