4 ms·
> If you look into street epistemology, it's similar to what I was doing. I don't see that what you were doing is all that close to what they do in street epis
by technothrasher 5y ago
> If you look into street epistemology, it's similar to what I was doing.
I don't see that what you were doing is all that close to what they do in street epistemology. Sure, you're both canvasing, and you're both attempting it instill doubt in people by asking questions, but the SE folks are trying to teach people better epistemological skills to evaluate any belief they hold or claim they come across. You were just attempting to fill the doubt void with some new claim, without teaching the people you talked to anything about how to evaluate the truth of a claim.
- themodelplumber 5y agoI didn't describe how I used the SE-like techniques, just the context in which they were used. Watch the recent Mormon Stories podcast with Shawn McCraney having SE used on him by Anthony Magnabosco and you'll see a good sample of A) how I talked to people a lot of the time and B) exemplary failure cases for SE based around ethics and subjective considerations. SE is in large part based around the metabolization of logic, specifically subjective-contextual logic, which I think the founder did a good job (humbly) showing has important boundaries as well. With some psychologies it will be like bringing MMA skills into an aerial dogfight. You have to decide if you want to win by holding out somehow or reassess the situation and toolset, maybe even ditching the win/lose idea if that's the way the situation started.