Every time Dawkins dumps on religion, my feed is full of people patiently explaining to him how he gets it wrong. And yet he keeps doing it. Is it too much to ask that a proponent of science and rationality should rationally update his beliefs in light of new evidence? Ah...https://twitter.com/ErikAngner/status/1103604440970469376 …
-
I'm not following you anymore.
Kuhn thought mature sciences are governed by overarching paradigms (as I'm sure you know). My point is that he might be wrong (your string theory example), but we should be very cautious before deciding that the issue has been definitively decided.
-
-
Dawkins is really making Kuhn's point, and flagging up continental philosophy as something odd in that respect. He's got a point. It is odd that philosophy incorporates such fundamentally divergent modes of going about things.
-
Just playing devil's advocate, but is it really any weirder than there being different kinds of martial arts? Kung Fu, Karate, Jiu Jitsu, etc
-
At its margins, I think it is. Other philosophers think so too. Scruton, for example, clearly thinks there something different about the work of Lacan, Deleuze & Badiou. It's a different *kind* of thing. (See his Fools, Frauds and Firebrands.)
-
Yesbut Dawkins is just complaining about the *label*; there's no reason to think he'd recognize Lacan if he hit him over the head with a two-by-four. And labels referring to geographic regions appear in the hard sciences as well, as D should know by nowhttps://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/334656775196393473 …
-
Okay, that's daft, obviously. But again, principle of charity. The label isn't arbitrary, it picks out the difference between Anglophone & continental traditions. It's not just a difference in interest. It's a deep rooted difference (at the margins). And that is odd!
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.