[FRIAM] Acid epistemology - restarting a previous conversation

[Steven A Smith]

Dave -

As for me, I'm not irritated with your keeping these discussions going. 

I *am* irritated with the larger (cross-domain, national/global)
discussion of "Truthiness" and the various bimodal fallacies introduced
thereby.

Science and the Scientific Method, for example, have built into them a
certain kind of contingency which is as absolute as Religion's *lack of
contingency* (Absolute Truth).  This leads
Creationists/PseudoSciencers/AntiSciencers/FlatEarthers/Deniers to use
the truism from science "It's just a theory" as a bludgeon to beat out a
hole in the conversation to plop down their received-knowledge and/or
made-up-shit into, as if it were made of the same stuff as what it is
displacing.

Conversely (and I think this is where you are prone to harp), the
Establishment (you pick your domain: Science, Religion, Politics,
Society and subdomain:Physics/Chemistry/Biology,
Ibrahamic/Vedic/Pagan/Animist, Red/White/Blue/Green/Purple, 
Authoritarian/Libertine/Egalitarian/Anarchic) vs radical/progressive
views on the same subjects yields a whole other false-dichotomy.   

 1. Just because an established authority said it doesn't make it right.
 2. Just because an established authority said it doesn't make it *wrong*.
 3. Just because all scientific breakthroughs were presaged by "radical
    ideas" doesn't mean that all "radical ideas" represent incipient genius.

Yet I often hear these arguments (barely concealed?) in the larger
discourse...  

I will try to follow this up with some questions/observations about
PostModernism and a reflection on the ways it has been "weaponized" by
the unlikely? folks like Stephen Bannon?

- Steve

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200305/6c34fe0a/attachment.html>