If by that, you mean accept that knowledge is always provisional and we cannot be absolutely certain of knowing anything but choosing to continue aiming for objective knowledge anyway and in the process developing medicines, technology & learning things about our world, yes.
-
-
Replying to @Atticus_Amber @HPluckrose and
Yes, I agree. But, that is a rationalist truth. Not a human truth, or a truth of the human condition
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Atticus_Amber @HPluckrose and
Well, that is the point. There is a blindness on your part
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @KeithJMANNIX @Atticus_Amber and
If there is only one truth, why can we not live in a utilitarian utopia? Why is there such complexity in creating rules of governance? Why do humans behave irrationally? There are rules which govern the maker of meaning which are not reducible to a rational perspective
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KeithJMANNIX @Atticus_Amber and
There are lots of truths, just not lots of different kinds of truth. The earth circulates the sun. This is true to the best of our knowledge. This will not enable us to form a perfect government or rewire our brains to be perfectly rational.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
But as usual, we have switched from 'Peterson doesn't deny the objectivity of truth in the same way as postmodernists' to 'Peterson is right to deny the objectivity of truth in the same way as postmodernists because discourses, myths, feelings, lived experience really are truth'.
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.