Senator John Thune recently issued this tweet.
You can argue that it's a denial of truth. But really, it's more like a tribal call. He is saying "I hate Obama," and he will be applauded by those who also "hate Obama." It's not a matter of truth. Here's Krugman's post on it: http://goo.gl/6a4yue. Here's my Google+ post: https://goo.gl/tt19Jz -- Russ On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:11 AM glen <[email protected]> wrote: > I enjoyed both the article and others' reactions to it, especially Grant's > distinction between determined vs. determinability. My own reaction was > one slightly tinged with nausea. Yes, it is lamentable when one's ideas, > one's ideology, allow(s) one to deny "truth" (new evidence). But it is > that very same thing that allows one to lament the denial of truth. > > McIntyre seems to be just as willfully ignorant as those he accuses, by > assuming > > a) there _exists_ a singe, One True Truth, and > b) we (all of us or an in-group few of us) can approach that Truth. > > The point has been made most clearly by Orgel's 2nd Rule: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgel%27s_rule . Why is it that we think > that what we think is better (or more real, or more effective, or more ... > whatever) than what _is_? Why is it that we think so intently about what > we think? We're like a bunch of navel-gazing drug addicts, thinking > intently about our own thoughts while the world moves on around us. > > There's a kind of circularity to McIntyre's lament (as well as other > truthers who continually lament the "truthers" -- 9/11 or whatever, or the > deniers that continually complain about the "deniers" -- climate change or > whatever). The most frustrating instance of this circularity is the > escalation to absurdity exhibited by the ongoing co-evolution between > "social justice warriors" and "political correctness freedom fighters" (for > lack of a better term). At some point, the frequency of the circular back > and forth out paces the recovery time needed by my "outrage neurons". > > At some point, all the finger-pointing, all the childish "yes it is" "no > it's not" "yes it is" back and forth makes me wish people like McIntyre > would soften their own rhetoric just enough to exhibit more self-doubt and > less other-doubt. it would have been more palatable if, e.g., he'd ended > the article with "I do my best, but often fail respect the truth." ... or > something of that sort, rather than ending with the implication that he's > _always_ capable of respecting the truth and knows full well that he always > infallibly does, especially right now in this article. > > But, as Russ points out, other-doubt is profitable, while self-doubt is > not. > > -glen > > On 06/08/2015 06:19 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote: > > Philosophy haters do not read the linked article. It mentions Andy > Norman. He is a member of the faculty at Carnegie Mellon, in the > department where I used to work. My daughter was a friend of his when they > were in high school in the 1980s. I am old. > > > > Frank > > > > http://m.chronicle.com/article/The-Attack-on-Truth/230631/ > > -- > ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella > There's a chamber that should always be full > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
