Template:Critical theory, modernism and the death of objective truth: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[[Critical theory]]’s grain of truth, ironically, is that ''there is no truth''. Well, not quite that: it is a self-refuting statement: but that the idea of a transcendent, objective “truth” is incoherent. There is no objective truth, ''because the idea of “objective truth” doesn’t make sense''. “Truth” is property of language. “Objects” are not. Objects ''aren’t'' true or false: ''only propositions about them are''. Propositions are linguistic artifacts. Outside the language they are uttered in, they are only marks on a page. | [[Critical theory]]’s grain of truth, ironically, is that ''there is no truth''. Well, not quite that: it is a self-refuting statement: but that the idea of a transcendent, objective “truth” is incoherent. There is no objective truth, ''because the idea of “objective truth” doesn’t make sense''. “Truth” is property of language. “Objects” are not. Objects ''aren’t'' true or false: ''only propositions about them are''. Propositions are linguistic artifacts. Outside the language they are uttered in, they are only marks on a page. | ||
This is its debt to [[post-modernism]], and it is a proposition that contemporary rationalists find hard to accept, whether hailing from the right — see {{author|Douglas Murray}}’s {{br|The Madness of Crowds}} for an articulate example — or the left {{author|Helen Pluckrose}}’s detailed examination in {{br|Cynical Theories}}. | This is its debt to [[post-modernism]], and it is a proposition that contemporary rationalists find hard to accept, whether hailing from the right — see {{author|Douglas Murray}}’s {{br|The Madness of Crowds}} for an articulate example — or the left — see {{author|Helen Pluckrose}}’s patient and detailed examination in {{br|Cynical Theories}}. | ||
The problem, all seem to agree, is this modern rejection of ''[[truth]]''. And it isn’t by any means limited to the critical theorists: it lives in Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts”, in Elon Musk’s [[twitter]] feed, and the generally relaxed attitude to rigorous fact-checking of the populist right. | The problem, all seem to agree, is this [[post-modern]] rejection of ''[[truth]]''. And it isn’t by any means limited to the critical theorists: it lives in Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts”, in Elon Musk’s [[twitter]] feed, and the generally relaxed attitude to rigorous fact-checking of the populist right. | ||
At the same time we lament the death of “[[authenticity]]” — is it the same thing as truth? Is it what we ''mean'' by “truth”? — and with it, the terminal defection of ''logic'' from the mechanical operation of the world. | At the same time we lament the death of “[[authenticity]]” — is it the same thing as truth? Is it what we ''mean'' by “truth”? — and with it, the terminal defection of ''logic'' from the mechanical operation of the world. | ||