💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › quoms-ten-thesis-on-leftist-epistemology.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 13:32:15. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Ten Thesis on Leftist Epistemology Author: Quoms Date: January 14, 2021 Language: en Topics: Epistemology, Nihilism, Truth, Theory Source: Retrieved on August 15, 2021 from https://quoms.tumblr.com/post/640305741133152256/ten-theses-on-leftist-epistemology
0. “Politically, standpoint epistemology being used as the sole
explanatory method has become increasingly disastrous.”[1]
1. Leftists should avoid mirroring reactionaries in their retreat into
Objectivity and Truth.
2. Objectivity and Truth are not the same thing as rational discourse,
although they share social and historical associations.
3a. Rational discourse as a framework upholds both the individual (the
independent consciousness capable of engaging in rational thought) and
the social (the exchange of ideas and the participatory construction of
knowledge through discourse).
3b. Objectivity and Truth as a framework opposes both the individual and
the social, by positing transcendent concepts which are outside of and
unalterable by the individual and society, and impose themselves as
constraints thereon.
4a. Rational statements are made by appealing to a set of socially
agreed-upon evaluative criteria, and therefore always leave themselves
open to challenge and critique within their own discursive framework.
4b. Statements of Objectivity and Truth can only be made by appealing to
external authority, and therefore do not leave themselves open to
challenge and critique within their own discursive framework. (They can
only be challenged by deliberately talking at cross purposes.)
5. That is (following 3-4), rational discourse presents an egalitarian
and socialising alternative, while Objectivity and Truth present an
authoritarian and alienating alternative.
6a. Objectivity and Truth require abandoning the insights of
post-modernism, because they are incompatible with the idea that
knowledge is socially constructed and contingent.
6b. Rational discourse does not require abandoning the insights of
post-modernism, because it embraces the idea that knowledge is socially
constructed through discourse.
7a. It is possible to engage in rational discourse without imagining
that said discourse is capable of generating transcendent Truth.
7b. The benefits of rational discourse have nothing to do with whether
it generates transcendent Truth or not.
8. The fact that rational discourse has clear benefits does not mean it
is necessary or appropriate all, or even most, of the time. (However,
its situational appropriateness or inappropriateness can be discussed
rationally.)
9. Understanding rational discourse as a means of reconciling subjective
worlds, rather than reaching a transcendent Objective world, allows all
subjectivities to be treated with equal dignity (instead of granting
them dignity according to their proximity to Objectivity) without
rendering them immutable or irreconcilable (as in standpoint
epistemology).
10a. Rational discourse is well-suited for a political left that views
the solutions to society’s problems as fundamentally social in nature,
and requiring the active, critical, voluntary participation of all
members of society.
10b. Objectivity and Truth are well-suited for a political left that
views the solutions to society’s problems as fundamentally technical in
nature, implementable by a small number of people with the rest of
society participating passively, uncritically, and involuntarily.
[1] https://quoms.tumblr.com/post/640145786432339968/hi-liker-of-rats-youve-mentioned-standpoint