Template:Critical theory, modernism and the death of objective truth: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:
Most conspiracy theories contain a grain of [[truth]]. Some are completely true. There has to be ''something'' for the credulous people to glom onto. As it matures, [[critical theory]] begins to resemble a [[conspiracy theory]].
Most conspiracy theories contain a grain of [[truth]]. Some are completely true. There has to be ''something'' for the credulous people to glom onto. As it matures, [[critical theory]] begins to resemble a [[conspiracy theory]].


[[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 — that 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 — see {{author|Helen Pluckrose}}’s patient and 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}}.