Yes, exactly. This is why I moved on from Luke's proposition to Matthew d'Ancona's. He also wanted to appreciate objective truth and the need for narratives but to integrate them rather than swing between them. I called this a form of metamodernism that could work.
Art is irrelevant to my aims here. People can do whatever they want to do with art. It doesn't have to be true, morally good, politically sound, evidenced or reasonable. I like some postmodern & religious & supernatural art. My interest is in the problem of post-truth society.
-
-
Art is essential. And it will certainly be essential to attacking the problems of a post-truth media. For example, my http://WWW.HEWILLNOTDIVIDE.US project, and what it has been through this year, is a very real example of how art can effect change in some small but significant way.
-
How has it made people value objective truth more? You were only saying a minute ago that things can be objective and subjective at the same time and its the interplay of this which is key so it seems unlikely you promoted science & reason.
-
For example, I've had (I feel important) discussions with senior figures in the media this year to express how it's their obligation to adjust their reporting of neo-Nazis attacking our work to reflect reality and not glorify them on their own terms. This has seen real progress.
-
I always promote science and reason. I'm not sure where you would get the impression that I've ever strived for anything else. I just happen to find those things the most wondrous and beautiful, and try to speak to that.
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.
)