10 votes

Why do people who subscribe to self-refuting skeptical philosophies still argue with others?

Your position would be reasonable against the kind of absolute relativists and radical skeptics that you describe. Unfortunately, those are only convenient straw men that are easy to refute, which is ...
  • 41.2k
10 votes
Accepted

Does Nietzsche's rejection of Socrates mean that he is a relativist about ethics?

I believe the Nietzsche's passage referred to is this one: "Socrates' decadence is suggested not only by the admitted wantonness and anarchy of his instincts, but also by the hypertrophy of the ...
  • 41.2k
9 votes

What is 'Pragmatic Encroachment'?

This question arises in the context of the traditional philosophical enquiry into the nature of knowledge. We might summarise that enquiry as: under what conditions is it correct to say that a person ...
  • 16.1k
8 votes
Accepted

Is Feyerabend confusing discovery and justification when he criticizes the scientific method?

That is what positivists and Popper would (and did) say. But in his own view Feyerabend is not confusing them, he is dissolving the distinction. And he was standing on the shoulders of giants. The ...
  • 41.2k
5 votes

Postmodernism advocates are Right-wing or just can't see its effects against the Left?

I admittedly lack a solid grounding in philosophy and likely some problems with postmodernist thought escape me. I am however one of those leftists who has no huge, general problem with all of ...
  • 547
4 votes
Accepted

Is it possible to have faith in science while espousing anti-realism?

Science assumes the real world in the same sense we assume that the Sun goes around the Earth in our everyday lives, or mathematics assumes an ideal realm populated with numbers and structures. It is ...
  • 41.2k
4 votes

How Relativistic is Social Constructivism?

I do not think that Searle will agree on labelling with "Social constructivism" his theory about Social relaity. According to Ian Hacking, Searle's book The Construction of Social Reality (1995), is ...
3 votes

Is Feyerabend confusing discovery and justification when he criticizes the scientific method?

I think not. The "methodological anarchist" approach adopted by Feyerabend into Against Method is that, pace Popper and Lakatos, there is no "absolute" and uncontroversial rational method to justify ...
3 votes

Why do people who subscribe to self-refuting skeptical philosophies still argue with others?

For Buddhists, one of the meanings of the word Dharma or Dhamma is 'universal law' (analogous to for example the Law of Gravity). Dhamma might be equated with "things the Buddha said". aren't they ...
  • 611
3 votes
Accepted

Karl Popper critiques to historical relativism

You can find Popper's most scathing critiques in his The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945, 2 vol.) and The Poverty of Historicism (1957).
  • 5,242
3 votes

Is Protagoras the philosophical root of the "Turing Test"?

Protagoras's famous statement that "man is the measure of all things" has been variously related to relativism, Perspectivism, subjectivism, phenomenalism, anti-realism and skepticism. But ...
  • 7,171
3 votes

Postmodernism advocates are Right-wing or just can't see its effects against the Left?

Reason, not logic; logic can be a type of positivism that ignores the concrete reality which is the life of the people. Logic can be a place to hide from the real. It is all so simple, the principle ...
  • 1,592
3 votes
Accepted

A philosophy of suspending disbelief. What is it called?

Are you thinking of a case where : S that not-p but intends to bring it about that s/he acquires the assumed [or known] to be] false belief that p           ? In your ...
  • 34.6k
3 votes

Arguments against Relativism

If the position taken by the relativist is that there are no objective truths, then the relativist must first claim an exception: P1. There are no objective truths (except this one). By dint of ...
3 votes
Accepted

Is postmodernism the historical source of epistemic relativism? And does epistemic relativism logically derive from postmodernism?

First of all, epistemic relativism is much less dangerous to science than it appears. Based on my (cursory) interactions with them, I would say that most historians of science are epistemic ...
3 votes
Accepted

Why is post-modernism so often equated to Relativism, are there any responses in postmodern philosophy that challenges this?

Postmodernism is a term used by critics, to group together a range of disparate thinkers, many of whom rejected the label, like Foucault. A good student of postmodern thought, should be very wary of ...
  • 11.6k
3 votes

Q: Is the argument for the truth of truth-relativism valid? If so, why so? If not, why not?

"If there are no absolute truths, then it cannot be stated that claims are only evaluable with respect to point of view. And if claims are only to be evaluated with respect to a point of view, ...
2 votes

Can a thing be a thing for a thing?

The argument that you mention certainly seems to change the notion of subjectivity, if it attributes subjectivity to, say, shoes... But I also think that it is not supposed to change the notion of ...
  • 7,171
2 votes

Which limit for relativism?

The truth is ... there is no ultimate truth. Our truth is momentary, incidental and at best, an agreement of relative sources. It is not finite and it is not rigid. There are many who argue against ...
2 votes

Which limit for relativism?

The question is: how do we get the philosophical speaking to stay connected with reality? Torturing people might be the wrong way to achieve that :) And your "torture chamber with a button" example ...
  • 5,242
2 votes
Accepted

Which limit for relativism?

The first step is to agree (or realize) that there are three levels/types of reality. 1) local(individual), 2) global(group), and 3) absolute reality. This realization is key so that the different ...
  • 1,752
2 votes

Why do people who subscribe to self-refuting skeptical philosophies still argue with others?

I'm one of those people who makes arguments like that, so I can at least give you some of the points of view I am sometimes using (when they suit me). One easy thing to point out is that "the belief ...
  • 17.2k
2 votes

Why do people who subscribe to self-refuting skeptical philosophies still argue with others?

I agree entirely with **@Conifold.* First, you are using "relativism" where you probably mean skepticism. To say something is "relative" is to say that its relational values are in fact related to ...
2 votes

Why do people who subscribe to self-refuting skeptical philosophies still argue with others?

As your quandary is framed, your conclusions cannot be faulted. However, the real issue in the area is whether there exist unique descriptions that “accurately” describe various aspects of the ...
  • 1,765
2 votes

Does humanism's rejection of God necesitate relativism?

Both the terms you use, 'humanism' and 'moral relativism', have several meanings but a manageable discussion is still possible - and useful. You interpret 'humanism' as a view that excludes the ...
  • 34.6k
2 votes

Has/can moral relativism be refuted and what are its implications for a true and useful ethical calculus?

Even if it were conclusively shown that morality isn't objective, it wouldn't follow that moral relativism is true. After all, there are many different metaethical theories that deny moral objectivity,...
  • 91
2 votes

Is it possible to have faith in science while espousing anti-realism?

1) How can anti-realists insist upon the use of scientific method or scientific theories? I take over from your question as definition of anti-realism “that there is no such mind-independent reality”....
  • 20.6k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible