6 ms·
Wait. Why, exactly, is this argument ridiculous? Your references are about the Sokal hoax; are you claiming this is a hoax too? Is your only evidence an unr
by Ensorceled 10y ago
Wait. Why, exactly, is this argument ridiculous? Your references are about the Sokal hoax; are you claiming this is a hoax too? Is your only evidence an unrelated 20 year old hoax?
I'm somewhat credulous about the original assertion myself, but what is just as bad as shoddy humanities scholarship is the out of hand dismissing of all humanities scholarship as shoddy.
- marcoperaza 10y agoThe argument is ridiculous because it's saying that people had no sense of self and identity until mirrors are invented. This is plainly false to anyone who is a human being. It is also plainly false with a cursory look at ancient literature, which is full of characters with strong egos.
- Ensorceled 10y agoThat's not actually what the article says. It's saying the that sense of identity was mostly experienced as a set of relationships and roles and that an identity distinct from any role or relationship became more common place after mirrors and the clear self picture that provided to people. It's also not "plainly false" ... most people identify themselves by their roles and relationships. If you ask people to describe themselves they will universally use role and relationship descriptors: computer programmer, cop, Catholic, mother, grandfather, ... It is common for people who retire to have difficulty with the loss of identity that their job and role their occupation provided.