If you are intelligent you will note how this does not bode well for Darwinist metaphysics.
-
-
Replying to @fides_et_cancri
what is "metaphysical" about Darwin in this sense
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @QuasLacrimas
Ex Carcini 🥀 Retweeted Ex Carcini 🥀
Technically my tweet is a continuation of a prior tweet here:https://twitter.com/fides_et_cancri/status/824096088911183872 …
Ex Carcini 🥀 added,
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fides_et_cancri @QuasLacrimas
In that ill-fated debate Peterson is making an argument about subsuming Truth to Darwinian Pragmatics (an idealistic hellhole)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fides_et_cancri @QuasLacrimas
When Truth becomes subsumed under Useful there are some problems that arise
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @fides_et_cancri @QuasLacrimas
Namely the 'for who/whom' thing. Nominalizes the entire process. Even though Harris is no essentialist he saw that issue.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @fides_et_cancri @QuasLacrimas
If you take darwinian frameworks to their logical conclusion and find you cant extract Truth from them thats a big problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
have i showed you these?pic.twitter.com/fkuUO9hTaw
-
-
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.