The Tyranny of the Subjective


#1

quillette.com/2018/03/19/the-tyr … ubjective/


#2

Bump…from a few months back…seems relevant somehow :slight_smile:


#3

sorry this anothr list of points rather than a well laid out post.

we have no idea who are new over-lords are, who are introducing this system.

This use of emotion has been part of the playbook. There wouldn’t have been Gulf war 1 if the kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter didnt cry the ‘incubator babies’ story.

The true sign of intelligence is to be able to take an alternative point of view and derive conclusions based on them. I give two examples , the guy who said that if diffraction were true, then light would meet at a point on the other side of the sphere. secondly stephen Hawkings nemesis in Oxford (the other professor), who told the young theoretician that if there was a big bang that there would be remnant of it around today, soon afterwards wilson and penzias discovered electromagnetic radiation in the sky no mater here they pointed their antenna.

I dont fully agree with the fact that experts are being sidelined , if this is the case then we are really bypassing the current system faster than the sinking of the steamboat oliver cromwell.


#4

Well I think the author is referring more to a political movement that seeks to afford primacy to what’s termed ‘lived experience’ over and above objective investigation or evidence based inquiry.

Obviously we’ve seen numerous examples of it during the course of the abortion debate but in the context of that one id argue that subjective experience is actually relevant to the presentation of one side of the debate. However you also had people stating that life doesn’t begin until after birth…because they say/feel so, regardless of the evidence provided to them.

The concept is now encouraged within the social sciences at University and is embedded within the new activist/issue focussed politics that appears to be taking hold. Easentially, unless you have ‘lived experience’ of any topic you are deemed not to have the right to engage.

Furthermore, ultimately there is deemed to be no value from seeking to understand an opposing stance. All that matters is your own subjectively lived experience, wants and desires. Democratic compromise is weakness based on the suggestion that all human relations are no more than an exercise in the dissemination or otherwise of Power. Debate itself is a form of oppression based on the fact that those better equipped to engage based on their education or knowledge etc are so simply because of their ‘privilege’ .

It’s basically an assault on rationality, on logic, on knowledge itself and on our ability to create a recognizable shared reality through which we may communicate and make sense of the world. Basically an assault on post enlightenment thought and civilization. And it’s only getting warmed up in Ireland.