So "if only they would listen to the facts" is a thing people sometimes say about climate change, for example. It implies that 1) there are established truths about climate change 2) which the speaker knows and 3) which the speaker's opponent ought to also know.https://twitter.com/mrgunn/status/1116486306043817984 …
-
Show this thread
-
IOW "listen to the facts" implies that the speaker and their opponent share an epistemic process for establishing shared truths and that the opponent is not participating in it. But we don't have such a shared process anymore. No shared trust in science, institutions, news, etc.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 likeShow this thread -
So "listen to the facts" gets heard by the opponent as: "I have better access to the truth than you." It's epistemically rude. Not a good way to get people to actually listen to you. Will not convince anyone who thinks climate change is a liberal conspiracy.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 likeShow this thread -
People who say "well, science is obviously trustworthy and has clearly established facts about climate change" aren't grappling with the genuine difficulty we now face of figuring out which fields of science we can trust and which suffer from reproducibility crises etc.
1 reply 2 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
"There are no facts" is a poetic way of pointing to all of this, as well as to a related and more subtle thing about different people living in vastly different "reality tunnels," in Timothy Leary / Robert Anton Wilson's sense. See e.g.https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/02/different-worlds/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
(Is there a cooler way to say "reality tunnels" these days? Seems like something
@vgr would've coined a more modern term for.)1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread
I’ve been using two terms: escaped reality and multitemporality
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.