Truth is relative to the observer

From Portal
Jump to: navigation, search


From: Lou LaFollette
To: Roger Anderton
Sent: 2013.23.26

Dear Roger,
(To say that "everybody accepts that truth is relative to the observer" is a sweeping generalization; a communication error, to which I am prone.) The purpose of philosophy is to provide "meaning" for the "facts" of science. The two are mutually reinforcing. Lately, theoretical physicists have been providing the "meaning" as well as the "facts", something which Newton declined to do. I think that it is fair to say that post-modernism is the dominant philosophy in academia today. A major tenet of post-modernism is that there is no objective truth - everything is relative to the observer - except the speed of light, of course, and a few other constants - a detail of which non-physicist post-modernists are largely ignorant. For those so inclined, there are many inconsistencies and contradictions in post-modernism which can be exposed as Dr. Lucas has pointed out. The "true" philosophy will be one which is consistent with the ultimate true facts of science which, I believe, we will ultimately come to know and agree upon. I admire your efforts to change the dominant thinking. You are to be commended.


From: Roger Anderton
To: Lou LaFollette
Sent: 2013.23.26

OK Lou

Much of what relativity believers say is based on that "sweeping generalization" though. And I don't think of post-modernism as one philosophy. Instead it's a collection of lots of philosophies; so any attack on it is diverted to those numerous philosophies; it's not an attack on a one-headed monster, instead its a hydra with many heads.
Roger A

Edited for wiki-style and page-linking. (dem/ll,ra)