There are a lot of interesting things you say here. But I will highlight a few things that frustrate me:
-
-
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
1) You seem to want to lump together a bunch of people and call them postmodernists, as if they have a unified conception for the kind of change they see necessary. I don't think that is possible.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
Incrementalism/revolution, objectivity/subjectivity, relativism/pluralism are all areas in which postmodernists thinkers disagree, which leads me to the next point.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
2) The actual citations used for what postmodernists think are scarce, and not very good at eliciting your concerns. If you think a group is doing something, provide a concrete example of them doing it. Otherwise, I think you are just trying to create a narrative.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
3) Fitting with the last point, in several places you say "In fact, wrong" or "utterly false", but you don't explain WHY these views are wrong, or why they are false.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
You say there is a postmodernist false dichotomy. I don't agree with you that this is a real postmodernist position, if there even is a single postmodernist position, but even then, I am not even sure the dichotomy is a false one. At least it isn't obvious.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
4) Your conception of modernism itself is artificial, in that I think there are going to be disagreements about what modernist projects have worked, or to what extent change is necessary or not. Your argument seems to be, more change is bad. But is that necessarily the case?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
Again, this is not defended in your article. You go on side tangents about the success of science. Great, I agree. But science being successful or not doesn't tell me to what extent society needs to change or how dramatically it should change.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @amiguello1 and
Because we're not claiming it. Nor do we claim that the science tells us to which extent society needs to change. How could it? Unless you're talking about Rauch's concept of liberal science which is to do with discussion and comparison and testing of all ideas.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @amiguello1 and
Then why are you against postmodernism?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Because postmodernism doesn't mean 'positive change.' We are for that. We don't think postmodernism is that for the reasons we set out in thousands of words. I have also linked two more essays specifically about the problem with postmodernism. You only need to read them.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @amiguello1 and
Are you telling me to educate myself? All I want you to do is actually defend what positive change is. You don't get to stipulate you are right and then dismiss those who disagree with you. Which is what you did in that article.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @amiguello1 and
We did that in the article. I'm very sorry if you don't understand it. Everyone else does. Try harder or give up? I absolutely do get to dismiss you. Goodbye.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.