Its the same old claims that we get with theology & postmodernism. I do actually find them both interesting. Just not true.
They contribute to the biggest problem PoMo brought us - the undermining of objective knowledge & the drive to search for it via science.
-
-
It removes the pressure to have your facts straight, present your evidence, test your hypotheses. You can just talk of other ways of knowing
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I can see why you see that as a problem. but as a psychology professor teaching an applied science we don't have full explanatory power yet
-
And I do this as a literature student studying narratives &the meaning they have for people. It's interesting &helps us understand ourselves
-
But it is vital not to blur subjective or cultural meaning with objective knowledge especially if we want to defeat postmodernism.
-
Subjective meaning is one thing but this is some sort of tangential objective truth. What would you call it?
-
Call what? I don't know what a tangential objective truth is.It can be objectively true that an idea which is not true is meaningful/helpful
-
This, and the porcupine and malaria examples if you watched ithttps://twitter.com/brendonbrewer/status/910065998367039489 …
-
But I'm not suggesting that its never helpful to believe things that aren't true. Just that we can acknowledge them as helpful but not true.
-
eg Everybody is Wrong about God looks at why religion is so important & helpful to ppl & how we cld supply same needs w/out false belief.
- 1 more reply
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.