3 ms·

I would prefer if †his conversation wasn't derailed into one about politics.

• dylan604 3y ago
  wasn't trying to go political, but used it as an example of the evidence not fitting your theory. so it's still some what scientific.
  • InitialLastName 3y ago
    There's a concept (presented as a contrast to "objective truth" and "subjective truth") called "intersubjective truth", which refers to ideas that are true because (and only to the extent that) a quorum of people believe they are true. Money, contracts and laws are all only words on a piece of paper in objective value. I can generate all of them myself, but unless other people start to treat them as if they are real they'll have all the power of words on paper. On the other hand, if a system arises where people believe those things are true and have value it can be used to build extraordinary things. Political systems are full of intersubjectivity (they mostly boil down to "groups of people coordinating societal resources, with the consent of enough of the governed"), so of course politics is an arena where "enough people believe this thing" is sufficient to generate truth.