3 ms·
But we can't reduce everything to equal opinion, an extreme relativism. There's also the conflict between truth and norms - sometimes the norms haven't caught u
by wolverine876 3y ago
But we can't reduce everything to equal opinion, an extreme relativism. There's also the conflict between truth and norms - sometimes the norms haven't caught up with the truth. Here are examples, without commenting on Israel and Gaza.
Think of climate change: should denialists be given time in a science class? It's a controversial issue; many believe the denialists; but factually it's wrong.
Think of Galileo teaching astronomy, when very few believed him. Should he have tolerated factually wrong opinions? It would be hard not to, but it would be a lie and waste of time.
- prepend 3y ago> Should he have tolerated factually wrong opinions? I think this is the crux. What was Galileo’s goal? I think it was to increase truth and help people. So I think he would need to find ways to engage with and convince people who had factually wrong opinions. It’s certainly ineffective to just not talk to people who don’t agree with you. And imagine how stupid people would have seemed if they posted something in the syllabus that said “Don’t even think of registering if you don’t agree with the fact of a geocentric universe.” I think the point is that there are certainly facts, but we need to have temperance and some level of tolerance to allow for convincing people, and learning for ourselves.