He does not DENY objective fact. That immediately makes him NOT a postmodernist. He accepts science wholeheartedly and defends it all the time. He also accepts that some truths are not empirical but embedded in ideas, in stories, in literature, etc.
-
-
That was my last attempt to explain. I have set out this distinction clearly several times and if the analogy does not make it clear what PoMos & JP are criticised for, I will have to accept that you are determined not to understand.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You are completely incapable of understanding that the concept of believing in scientific fact and believing that there are truths scientific method cannot examine are compatible. You want to paint them as mutually exclusive when they are not.
-
Hitchens had a great retort to this line of thinking. He basically said if something supernatural truly exists then it is by definition scientific. We just haven't discovered it yet. So no. Peterson can't have it both ways.
-
We're not talking about supernatural claims, we're talking about the truths of human existence and being outside the wheelhouse of science where morality, ethics, and living exist. Belief in only science results in meaninglessness materialism and nihilism, or an unhappy existence
-
I disagree in specific ways if you'll indulge me. 1. Morality & Ethics: First off those are man made concepts. Humans are slaves to science & the laws of physics. So must be their concepts.
-
2. If we can agree that less human suffering is universally desirable moral outcome of civilization then again, where did that come from? Evolution? Fine. Still science & physics. Still an empirical truth.
-
3. Staying on morality, although you profess your non religious status the argument that morality comes from "outside" the physical realm is a religious argument. If you say morality is subjective then it's a PoMo argument. You say you're neither? Hmm.
-
4. While we don't have the answers for why humans (except 10% sociopathic) seem to be born with an innate mortality (studies prove this), the fact is that morality & ethics are no more outside the realm of science than clouds. Which, like behavior, can look magical but aren't.
-
5. As for your claim that a purely scientific outlook on life leads to an empty "materialistic" existence, again, science disproves this reductive & disproven assumption. At the risk of sounding like JP, we, our consciousness & thoughts, aren't material at all.
- 2 more replies
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.