Morosoph's Journal: Reality is Singular

Of late there has been an explosion of Journal articles and other postings where some posters have been referring to "different realities" or "different truths", especially when dealing with such things as evolution. This is bullshit. Being wrong is one thing, but "different truths" is the ultimate cop-out.

"Reality is Singular" is the title that I gave to this post, but really physical (as opposed to moral) relativism is pretty self-evidently rubbish. What's probably worse, though is the so-called Consensus theory of truth, whereby Newton and Copernicus where insane upon discovery of their respecitive theories, and presumably became sane through convincing others of the results of their own investigations.

When arguing on issues such as Creationism, the consensus theory is worse than being wrong, for the criteria for acceptance shift. If truth is a matter of consensus, then arguments about how dreadful it would be if something were false gain weight. Creationism perhaps should be believed, then, because Christianity induces social cohesion. Punishment works, because it justifies a simple moral outlook, when someone looking at the evidence would see that punishment is only moderately effective, and indeed its effectiveness is highly variable, depending upon context. "Left-wing" criticisms of Richard Dawkins' theories, without appealing to religion tend to have a nod to this, together with ad hominem attacks upon the motives of genetic theorists who's work he's built upon. Such a world soon becomes intellectually claustrophobic as one's thoughts have to be self-policed for political correctness.

To embrace theories of "consensus reality" is to give up upon civilisation, and indeed that there is anything beyond politics. Far from overcoming social division, it entrenches warring tribes, for there is no way that evidence can shift an argument one way or the other. All is politics, and truth is replaced with a simple Marxian political dialectic, where palatability overwhelms reality. Society suffers too, as those who speak their minds are hounded out of their jobs. Consider the repercussions of Lawrence Summers's speech.

Update: More on this starting with Marxist Hacker 42's comment, mercedo's JE, and his second JE.

Occasionally, I might add further links. (1, 2, 3)

I like the cut of your jib, young man.

[turgid]

You make a very sound argument.

It seems to me that in the USA especially, there is extreme social pressure to acknowledge the existance of a god. Not only that, rational argument on the subject is covertly supressed (through social pressure) and overtly in some states, especially the Southern ones, through legislation.

What disappoints and frightens me, is that here in the UK, a senior religious figure has called for more religion in politics. Nothing could be more misguided. A modern, civilised and multic

Influence verses Logic

[Morosoph]

Thanks, turgid. This journal entry is more about the effects of such thinking 'though, which I naturally don't consider to be a strong argument, although it might be an influential one. My logical argument is made starting from my post by the same name [slashdot.org]. I've not seen any flaws in it, but that doesn't mean that they're not there.

I'm also a Brit, BTW; my Jefferson quote "He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives lig

Hehheheh

[Stargoat]

I like it. :)

Truth is the best available approximation of reality. Whereas Newton would have been truth in 1650, Einstein was truth in 1930, and Hawkins truth in 1975. None of these are truth today.

Part of the problem is determining truth from the loads of not-truth (which I will not call lies, as I believe lies require some sort of incentive (and perhaps intent) to decieve). We know truth can be found because reality exists. But reality is not truth, though truth approaches reality.

You'll like this...

[Morosoph]

Scientific American apologise [boingboing.net] for their one-sided reporting [blogspot.com] :o)

Language Doesn't Reflect Reality Well

[mercedo]

Very interesting argument, I like it. I had rarely encountered discussions about these terms in American website.

Language is the best tool to get access to reality, but inevitably there is a difference in language and reality, because language doesn't reflect reality as it is. So language's always been a poor tool to get access to reality, I think you have already fully noticed what I try to imply here.

Re:Language Doesn't Reflect Reality Well

[Morosoph]

I had rarely encountered discussions about these terms in American website.

Heh. Well, I'm a Brit, and I try to get to first principles. Of course, doing so is difficult, as it's very easy to make a mistake, so I always wonder whether I've missed someone else's real point. Making others' words fit your preconceptions is the easiest thing in the world!

You're right in that there are always communication problems; illustration, analogy and poetry are sometimes essential in getting meaning across. Suc