You've read Maps of Meaning where he sets out his view of objective truth & the affective reality of the mythic world? How does this differ from postmodernism?pic.twitter.com/WNggI6L8kP
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Well, of course lived experience is one of the roots of truth. It's simply a form of Empiricism. Scientists' research is done as a subset of lived experience. Does that invalidate their work?
No, it's not. They do not talk about how they experience the results of experiments. They show the results. I need to go to bed. Enough now.
That's not true at all. They observe the results. Observation is a lived experience. If you never had the lived experience of observing an apple fall, you wouldn't be able to reason about theories and then conduct experiments with more dropped apples.
No, observation is not what is meant by lived experience. This is a much deeper thing which JPB refers to in terms of archetypes.
Well sure it goes deeper, but we're not at that level. We'd have to work up to it. Peterson's views are reducible to a rationalist, materialist, scientific, empiricist definition. I sincerely mean that, because I come from that camp. But it takes a bit to lay that out.
Archetypes are observable, because we see them repeatedly in cultures across time. What they are, like metaphysically, is tough to define. But it's hard to say what a number is metaphysically as well. But numbers are enormously useful, so we use them. Archetypes are similar.
That's where a touch of the Pragmatism comes in. No one knows what the hell math is - but we accept that it's useful and true and beautiful for whatever reason. But it's certainly not "false" just because it isn't composed of baryonic matter.
Archetypes persist across time and across culture, with profound psychological impact on people. Writers use them liberally because we pretty much only care about archetypal stories. People brand themselves archetypally and it works for some damn reason. It's not easy to dismiss.
No - the difference is that he acknowledges that different myths and narratives aren't as adaptive to the environment, which is his criterion for "true", as in heading in the right direction "true as an arrow".
This means acknowledging that the environment selects for some rather than others, which is totally different from po-mo.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.