|
|
|
|
|
by AnimalMuppet
572 days ago
|
|
I would say it differently. Even using your example, "smoking is good for you" is objectively less true than "smoking is bad for you". We know that now. The problem is that 1) we don't always have enough data to know what is true, and 2) we have a lot of people working as hard as they can to obscure the truth in order to push their own agenda. All those post-modernist philosophers that I scoffed at were on to something: If we cannot determine the truth from the data available to us, then in practice, there is no truth. That may not have been the point they were trying to make, but for us who are living in it, it works out the same. |
|