83,046
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) 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 | [[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}}. |