To add context I saw two people discussing something and then a third person came in and said it was postmodernist relativism.
Initial topic (Eulers Identity) : “equation exists, therefore god, I have no response to that, ya beat me, the equation clearly exists”
Person A response: “Yeah cuz humans made them”
Person B in response to A: “So if humans didn’t exist 1 apple + 1 apple wouldn’t equal 2 apples?”
A to B: “no they’d just be apples”
Person C comes in and says to A: “That response is postmodernist relativism, in a nutshell. ‘If it exists beyond human experience, well then it just doesnt actually exist, because I dictate reality.'”
Is person C correct in thinking that Person A has postmodernist relativism? Very confused because to me it seems like Person A is being dumb and picking a hill to die on. Can someone please explain to me what postmodernist relativism is and tell me how it is relevant in this context?
Thank you
In: Other
Person A is hitting on a somewhat relevant point that we really only understand the universe as conscious subjects, we have an inherent perspective as an observer that we cannot shake off. In describing the universe we say things like “there are two apples” and yeah, apples as such are a human construct to some extent, and all math and philosophy is just describing stuff as we best can. However that isn’t postmodernism or relativism as they are usually usually used. And while I would support a place for scientific subjectivity, I don’t think “but that’s just because we say so mannnnn” is a particularly useful critique like 90% of the time.
A priori truths like those found in mathematics are really not the socially constructed truths postmodernists were interested in dismantling.
I could get into the Kuhn paradigm shift thing in science or the Duhem-Quine thesis but I don’t think you’re there yet.
Latest Answers