7 ms·

>More explicitly, according to Rorty, the schemes and patterns regulating social relations do not derive from reason and its canonicity but rather from self-ima

>More explicitly, according to Rorty, the schemes and patterns regulating social relations do not derive from reason and its canonicity but rather from self-images created by the community on the basis of solidarity of its members. (7) In opposition to reason and its norms, solidarity does not need any justification or legitimation given that the social bond expressed by it is prior to any act of legitimizing claims to truth attempted by reason. And this kind of idiotic thinking leads to a broken society where we are conditioned from childhood to pretend that all cultures are equal and that all differences are purely social constructions. Except for the most pampered societies, cultural norms are at least partly a manifestation of successful survival strategies in different environments. They are emergent and based in the truths of reality that postmodernists delude themselves into believing do not exist. No patriarchy necessary. The modern deconstructive movements that were spawned by postmodernism have effectively become rebellion for the sake of rebellion. Progress for the sake of progress. Anything we do differently from our ancestors is automatically superior - that's why these movements have such draw from young, vulnerable, naive, college aged children. The only truth in these movements is deliberate change - but thousands of years of development of civilization has infused our various cultures with a wealth of heuristics which postmodernists (and modern leftist movements which are postmodernist offspring) cannot acknowledge because their definition of truth is backwards and, frankly, unscientific.

danharaj 7y ago
> And this kind of idiotic thinking leads to a broken society where we are conditioned from childhood to pretend that all cultures are equal and that all differences are purely social constructions. You don't read the thinkers you are calling idiots and you don't understand what you cited. > Truth is in mathematics Of all the human activities concerning truth, mathematics has the easiest time demonstrating its limitations, its inherent circularity, and the fact that in its absolute form it is ultimately out of reach for human beings. Your vulgar High Rationality is built on sand.
- twomoretime 7y ago
  >You don't read the thinkers you are calling idiots and you don't understand what you cited. I am not calling these philosophers idiots, I am saying that they encourage dangeous thinking. The OP quotes: >Patterns regulating social relations do not derive from reason. And what I'm saying is that they partly do, as emergent adaptations to reality, except in pampered cultures where comforts erase impetus. I deleted the part about mathematics because it was no longer applicable to what I ended up writing. >Your vulgar High Rationality is built on sand My high rationality is built on the observation that a large swath of people actually believe that there is little value in the cultural norms of old. I used to feel similarly. Then I grew up. My vulgarity is built on frustration with the modern state of the world and the headstrong ignorance of the young adult population in the US. Here's a case in point - ignorant young people would be less uppity if they were taught to show amount some respect to elders. Not blindly, but in the US we seem to have lost an appreciation for the experience that comes with age.
  - danharaj 7y ago
    Ok boomer
    - twomoretime 7y ago
      Ironic response. I'm in my late 20s. Not a boomer, just on the spectrum.
      - danharaj 7y ago
        Boomer is a state of mind.
  - non-entity 7y ago
    > My vulgarity is built on frustration with the modern state of the world and the headstrong ignorance of the young adult population in the US. Wow young people who lack experience are often headstrong and ignorant. Brilliant, groundbreaking observation there. This surely has not been a thing since civilization began. > Here's a case in point - ignorant young people would be less uppity if they were taught to show amount some respect to elders. And what "respect" should that be. I'll extend a base level of respect and courtesy to everyone, until I have a reason not to. Not all ideas have merit just because they are traditional, just like new ideas are not inherently better than old ones
- yters 7y ago
  If math isn't true, how are you typing this?
  - nicky0 7y ago
    No consistent logic can reach all truth.
    - ganzuul 7y ago
      There are many, wonderful kinds of logics which no mind like Gödel's has yet starved to death. Gödel true to his philosophy starved to death rather than be poisoned. If this was a poem I would call it fiction, for its impossible perfection.
      - nicky0 7y ago
        > There are many, wonderful kinds of logics which no mind like Gödel's has yet starved to death. For example?
        ganzuul 7y ago
        Paraconsistent logic.
        danharaj 7y ago
        "Paraconsistent logic" by no means points out any particular logic: There are a lot of logics that are called paraconsistent because they have models refuting ex falso. But I've yet to see one that was useful for anything or illuminated anything about truth. There are a lot of useless formal logics out there.
        ganzuul 7y ago
        It's a class of examples... This guy writes well about them: https://github.com/TeamSPoon/logicmoo_workspace/issues/22 https://github.com/TeamSPoon/logicmoo_workspace/issues/22 My own view on truth exists very far from but in the same space as logic. I don't think a formal truth can exist as a singleton, but that one must consider the set of all statements together with all possible truths. Maybe this is a matrix of statements times the transpose of statements but I'm not sure about that implementation. Anyway, you get an immensely sparse product where statements match up with everything that is true about those statements, along with everything that is false about those statements. You can then attempt to compress this data and that compression is the logic. The vast sparseness, meaning much more false evaluations than true ones, implies a lot of structure which can be exploited in compression. I don't think anything but many-valued logic like this can be consistent.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  You could offer more than just "you don't know, and you don't understand". You could offer some knowledge and understanding. It's fine to complain that critics of postmodernism don't understand it. But to not then explain looks a lot like hiding from criticism. "You don't understand, but I'm right and you're wrong" is not a productive conversation. It's smug arrogance that assumes its own superiority but won't actually engage with critics.
vangelis 7y ago
I own a gun to defend myself from people who say my beliefs are less than equal and don't deserve to exist! Come and take it.
dang 7y ago
Please stop taking HN threads further into ideological and nationalistic flamewar. We already asked you this. It destroys what this site exists for, so we ban accounts that do it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- twomoretime 7y ago
  Hi dang, Let me preface this by thanking you for the effort you've put into building this unique and invaluable community. I'm sorry to occasionally make your life difficult, as you mention this isn't the first time I've been disciplined. I recognize the pressures that lead you to censor certain accounts - however given the amount of soft power that you wield, I would kindly ask you to keep in mind that consistently and primarily suppressing only one set of views, which are potentially held by 25-50% of the population, breeds extremism. The fact that these rational views are effectively banned from every major platform only forces the polarization that we are witnessing in our society.
  - dang 7y ago
    You lose me here: > consistently and primarily suppressing only one set of views That's nothing like how HN is moderated. You may be falling prey to the notice-dislike bias: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20notice%20dislike&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... I don't actually know what your views are, but wherever they land, I can guarantee you a long list of commenters complaining that "suppression" on HN goes exactly the other way.
    - twomoretime 7y ago
      Is there anyway to generate a list of flagged posts to perform a more rigorous statistical analysis? I understand what you're saying, and I viewed the collection of contradicting examples, but it is unlikely that there isn't a predominant set of viewpoints on HN. Without choosing a side, there's no question that user flagging and mod moderation is likely to fall somewhere on the ideological spectrum and I'd love a chance to determine where.

danharaj 7y ago

> And this kind of idiotic thinking leads to a broken society where we are conditioned from childhood to pretend that all cultures are equal and that all differences are purely social constructions. You don't read the thinkers you are calling idiots and you don't understand what you cited. > Truth is in mathematics Of all the human activities concerning truth, mathematics has the easiest time demonstrating its limitations, its inherent circularity, and the fact that in its absolute form it is ultimately out of reach for human beings. Your vulgar High Rationality is built on sand.

twomoretime 7y ago
>You don't read the thinkers you are calling idiots and you don't understand what you cited. I am not calling these philosophers idiots, I am saying that they encourage dangeous thinking. The OP quotes: >Patterns regulating social relations do not derive from reason. And what I'm saying is that they partly do, as emergent adaptations to reality, except in pampered cultures where comforts erase impetus. I deleted the part about mathematics because it was no longer applicable to what I ended up writing. >Your vulgar High Rationality is built on sand My high rationality is built on the observation that a large swath of people actually believe that there is little value in the cultural norms of old. I used to feel similarly. Then I grew up. My vulgarity is built on frustration with the modern state of the world and the headstrong ignorance of the young adult population in the US. Here's a case in point - ignorant young people would be less uppity if they were taught to show amount some respect to elders. Not blindly, but in the US we seem to have lost an appreciation for the experience that comes with age.
- danharaj 7y ago
  Ok boomer
  - twomoretime 7y ago
    Ironic response. I'm in my late 20s. Not a boomer, just on the spectrum.
    - danharaj 7y ago
      Boomer is a state of mind.
- non-entity 7y ago
  > My vulgarity is built on frustration with the modern state of the world and the headstrong ignorance of the young adult population in the US. Wow young people who lack experience are often headstrong and ignorant. Brilliant, groundbreaking observation there. This surely has not been a thing since civilization began. > Here's a case in point - ignorant young people would be less uppity if they were taught to show amount some respect to elders. And what "respect" should that be. I'll extend a base level of respect and courtesy to everyone, until I have a reason not to. Not all ideas have merit just because they are traditional, just like new ideas are not inherently better than old ones
yters 7y ago
If math isn't true, how are you typing this?
- nicky0 7y ago
  No consistent logic can reach all truth.
  - ganzuul 7y ago
    There are many, wonderful kinds of logics which no mind like Gödel's has yet starved to death. Gödel true to his philosophy starved to death rather than be poisoned. If this was a poem I would call it fiction, for its impossible perfection.
    - nicky0 7y ago
      > There are many, wonderful kinds of logics which no mind like Gödel's has yet starved to death. For example?
      - ganzuul 7y ago
        Paraconsistent logic.
        danharaj 7y ago
        "Paraconsistent logic" by no means points out any particular logic: There are a lot of logics that are called paraconsistent because they have models refuting ex falso. But I've yet to see one that was useful for anything or illuminated anything about truth. There are a lot of useless formal logics out there.
        ganzuul 7y ago
        It's a class of examples... This guy writes well about them: https://github.com/TeamSPoon/logicmoo_workspace/issues/22 https://github.com/TeamSPoon/logicmoo_workspace/issues/22 My own view on truth exists very far from but in the same space as logic. I don't think a formal truth can exist as a singleton, but that one must consider the set of all statements together with all possible truths. Maybe this is a matrix of statements times the transpose of statements but I'm not sure about that implementation. Anyway, you get an immensely sparse product where statements match up with everything that is true about those statements, along with everything that is false about those statements. You can then attempt to compress this data and that compression is the logic. The vast sparseness, meaning much more false evaluations than true ones, implies a lot of structure which can be exploited in compression. I don't think anything but many-valued logic like this can be consistent.
AnimalMuppet 7y ago
You could offer more than just "you don't know, and you don't understand". You could offer some knowledge and understanding. It's fine to complain that critics of postmodernism don't understand it. But to not then explain looks a lot like hiding from criticism. "You don't understand, but I'm right and you're wrong" is not a productive conversation. It's smug arrogance that assumes its own superiority but won't actually engage with critics.

vangelis 7y ago

I own a gun to defend myself from people who say my beliefs are less than equal and don't deserve to exist! Come and take it.

dang 7y ago

Please stop taking HN threads further into ideological and nationalistic flamewar. We already asked you this. It destroys what this site exists for, so we ban accounts that do it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

twomoretime 7y ago
Hi dang, Let me preface this by thanking you for the effort you've put into building this unique and invaluable community. I'm sorry to occasionally make your life difficult, as you mention this isn't the first time I've been disciplined. I recognize the pressures that lead you to censor certain accounts - however given the amount of soft power that you wield, I would kindly ask you to keep in mind that consistently and primarily suppressing only one set of views, which are potentially held by 25-50% of the population, breeds extremism. The fact that these rational views are effectively banned from every major platform only forces the polarization that we are witnessing in our society.
- dang 7y ago
  You lose me here: > consistently and primarily suppressing only one set of views That's nothing like how HN is moderated. You may be falling prey to the notice-dislike bias: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20notice%20dislike&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... I don't actually know what your views are, but wherever they land, I can guarantee you a long list of commenters complaining that "suppression" on HN goes exactly the other way.
  - twomoretime 7y ago
    Is there anyway to generate a list of flagged posts to perform a more rigorous statistical analysis? I understand what you're saying, and I viewed the collection of contradicting examples, but it is unlikely that there isn't a predominant set of viewpoints on HN. Without choosing a side, there's no question that user flagging and mod moderation is likely to fall somewhere on the ideological spectrum and I'd love a chance to determine where.