But it is important to distinguish these from what is known to be true according to evidence & so easy to do that.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @premodernism and
eg Sokal & Bricmont criticise the postmodernists on these grounds & Peterson does the same kind of thing.pic.twitter.com/tfJlN6Z0VM
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @premodernism and
When it would be so easy to just say 'This myth is important & meaningful to this group for these reasons but it's not true.'
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's not just myths though... He's knows you can't get an ought from an is... he wants to know how to find the oughts...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So do we all. I say it should be evidenced-based & worked out according to principles, not archetypes &narratives that are meaningful to ppl
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Where do you get the principles from though? You have to make a non-evidence based value judgement at some point.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes & you have to set them out clearly & justify them with recourse to data, consequences.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think you would agree that you must nest those value judgments in history/evolution as well?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I don't know what that means. We can certainly look at history & evolutionary psychology as underlying values we have when we argue for them
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @premodernism and
I think it might mean giving credence to ideas and customs just cos they're there and are regarded as important in case they actually are
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, that is a problem. That's how we ended up with Christianity for so long & it took 1000 years to get back to science.
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.