But can’t we acknowledge that a type of knowledge (or a norm of knowledge) is culturally constructed AND that one can still argue for its superiority to others types or norms of knowledge ? Isn’t it what western scientific tradition mostly achieved?
-
-
-
(At least by pairwise comparison and even allowing discussion of the criteria for such a judgement of superiority/preferabllity?)
-
Tweet unavailable
-
It’s dangerous because it attempts to invalidate science that saves lives! I wonder how many pomos refuse heart surgery because “scientist is a social construct so surgery is meaningless.” Asshats
-
I actually totally agree with that. I just claim that the appeal to scepticism which is dangerous does not follow directly from the social construction analysis. There’s a hidden assumption that it does which is passed in postmodernist folklore rather than the analysis itself.
-
I'm sorry, I didn't understand a thing you just wrote. And I have a PhD so I'm not exactly an idiot (no matter what my gf says).
-
Well if you want to think about it and have questions on terms don’t hesitate to ask but I did not mean to use anything colloquial here.
-
Actually I think I use only terms you used in your own reply.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
culturally construed, maybe.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I’m not denying there could be objective truths, just that as cultural beings we may never be able to completely rule out the effects of our own subjective (and cultural) experience.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's easy if you try.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Abso-fucking-lutely.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.