No it's not James, it's not just a semantic issue, it's a real issue that has practical consequences. Introducing distinctions isn't just a philosophical parlour game. Otherwise we could say the diff between a conservative and a Nazi is just semantic.
-
-
Replying to @colwight @GodDoesnt
This is not the same. Social constructivism can and does have different meanings. How can we deal with the madness if we don't use words being used for it? Just discussed the Damore memo which used 'social constructivism' 4 times and we addressed what was meant by that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If we had insisted on acting as tho Damore was criticising what you call social constructivism, we could never have discussed what he actually was criticising - blank slatism. The conversation would have failed. The problem of enforcing blank slatism could not have been addressed
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @GodDoesnt
But why call it social constructivism when you mean blank slatism?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I didn't name it that! Damore did because this is what it is called in a discourse separate to your philosophical one. There's very little use railing against the slippage and evolution of terms. You'll end up sounding like an old man yelling 'Gay means 'happy!"
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.