I'm here. I agree with you on the problem of blank slatism, disagree bible stories & Jungian archetypes help with this, agree postmodernism is at the root of the SocJus problem, disagree on why & how, agree we need to defend free speech, disagree on sexual morality. Best I can dohttps://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/999291589414588418 …
-
-
We are drowning in stupid things as we try to discuss bigger issues. I cite Petterson and Sam Harris' first debate, where they ended up lost in arguing about just what the concept of 'truth' is. I see this in intellectual debate again and again. How to prevent this?
-
I thought that was perhaps the most important thing to debate before one can even move on. Not a “just” at all.
-
I understand people not wanting to get bogged down in definitions of concepts but address what is actually happening, why & what we can do about it. I frequently get frustrated when philosophically minded people focus on definitions to the extent that no productive convo happens.
-
However, I think our understanding of truth and knowledge has changed radically with postmodernism & post-truth and we cannot possibly hope to address current political and cultural problems without understanding how all parties are seeing truth & knowledge.
-
Peterson has struck a nerve, and the question of what need he's meeting and how to meet it without cranking up the fog-maker is one that I intend to bravely wait for you to answer while ciriticizing every little misstep along the way. Good luck!
-
Thanks.
I did address it a bit here but the problem of how to supply human needs for emotionally resonant metanarratives & something akin to spirituality without losing empirical truth & reason will probably always be with us. We are stupid apes.https://areomagazine.com/2017/12/08/the-problem-with-truth-and-reason-in-a-post-truth-society/ … -
The other problem I have with the Dillahunty/Harris/etc argument is: how can one ever “prove”the supernatural if what constitutes proof (solely the empirical) would automatically move the phenomenon into the realm of the natural?
-
I find this uninteresting. If something supernatural exists and cannot be known in the natural realm, its existence cannot be known by us and there seems little point in speculating about it. If people want to, they can, of course but no-one else has to take them seriously.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yeh. The skill of being able to say: ‘I think so-and-so is wrong about X and here’s why’ is tremendously undeveloped. It’s much easier for us to think about goodies and baddies. Don’t like Peterson’s Jungian worldview? Say why you think it’s wrong or leads to bad outcomes.
-
(Be more like you basically)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I always appreciate your commentary.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How to avoid reacting (mostly in disgust) to certain intellectuals?
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.