4 ms·

Discussions about epistemology becomes very tiresome when shoehorned into everything.

• feralimal 6y ago
  "Can't we just assume the standard narrative is correct, and work with that? What harm can it do?"
  • gameswithgo 6y ago
    saying we can’t know much about neanderthal spiritual life is probably correct, but poster went on to claim nothing can be learned from history which is the sort of obviously nonsense viewpoint people adopt when the lessons of history don’t agree with what they want to be true, currently
    • feralimal 6y ago
      You are right, very little can be learned from history, IMO. We get a very skewed and biased view of history on anything that matters. If you want an example, take a look at star forts. These forts are often beautiful. And they are all over the world - UK, US (the statue of Liberty has one for its base), Canada, Japan, Russia. They are least 3-400 years old. I never learnt about these in school. But there they are. Who built them? Why did they build them like that? http://starforts.com/ http://starforts.com/
      • InfiniteRand 6y ago
        That link has a very reasonable theory about the why "The design of the starfort did away with "dead zones," or areas in which an attacker cannot be brought under fire, by the use of triangular bastions which command all approaches."
        • feralimal 6y ago
          Yes - but which society created all these similarly designed forts 100s of years ago, across the world? They weren't thrown up by a small group of pilgrims - they were brilliantly engineered and took effort to make. But I didn't learn anything about these castles at school. And we did do castles in history - it was my favourite thing. So what are we missing or misunderstanding.
• disown 6y ago
  It's also tiresome when people try to shoehorn big philosophy words they just incorrectly learned to stifle discussion. OP was pointing out the speculative nature of the article. It's a question about evidence, facts and agenda. Epistemology is a philosophic inquiry into the nature of knowledge. Calling out speculative nature of an article isn't the same as trying to dismiss it with by epistemology.