The question 'What do you think of so-and-so?' really needs to be answered with 'I know him/her mostly in relation to this idea about which I think...' but it's probably better not to ask that question at all in most situations and start with the ideas.
-
-
It only becomes a problem when people claim it to be knowledge and that it should influence public policy or academia. Theology has the longest history of this but feminist epistemology is the only thing I know to be getting away with it now in a way which affects wider society.
-
Humility in the face of the non-empirical does seem to me a legitimate cornerstone of both public policy and academic study. The problem of course is when ppl make claims in one realm of truth where it belongs in the other.
-
Sure but that doesn't take long. You can say 'We don't know everything and all knowledge is provisional' and then get back to focusing on what we can know and better and worse ways to do that. PoMos, theologians & metaphysicians tend to prefer to dwell in the fog of not-knowing
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.
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.