You're kind of playing with semantics here... Maybe think of "one story vs many stories" as having one tab open vs multiple tabs open
-
-
Replying to @visakanv @BrentBeshore and
(I totally see the value in statements like "the story is that there's no story", but that isn't useful in the context of this model)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @visakanv @kyleschen and
Definitely not trying to play with semantics. I’d love to understand the framework. How I read the logic is as follows:
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
A pragmatist doesn’t believe in one overarching narrative, or a story that explains the past and predicts the future.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
The pragmatist sees the truth that there is no ultimate truth.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
Per the definition of pragmatism, he/she sees thought as “an instrument for prediction/problem solving."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
A fundamentalist believes that one story fundamentally explains/predicts. He/she doesn’t use thought and instead relies on a dogma.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
My confusion is that both are narratives that explain the truth about how the world works.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
Both are stories, with different theories/assumptions. Both have dogmas.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrentBeshore @visakanv and
So a person who thinks there are only small stories is a fundamentalist as much as someone who believes there is one big story.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Think relativist stories vs canonical rather than big/small. Canonical narratives (like Whig history) assume an absolute narrative spacetime
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.