You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

VoiceOfRa comments on Open thread 7th september - 13th september - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Elo 06 September 2015 10:27PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (146)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ike 07 September 2015 04:14:20AM 3 points [-]

(Reposted from the previous OT)

One of my professors claimed that postmodernism, and particularly its concept of "no objective truth", is responsible for much of the recent liberalism of society, through the idea of "live and let live". (Specific examples given were attitudes towards legalization of gay marriage and drugs.) I pointed out that libertarianism and liberalism predated postmodernism historically, and they said that that's true, but you can still trace the popularity back to postmodernism.

Is this historically accurate? If not, is there something I can point to that would convince them? It seems to me that the shift in society is much more a shift on the object level questions than on the meta level "should we ban things we disagree with", but I don't know very much recent history of philosophy (it isn't strictly their field either, so I'm justified in not taking them at face value).

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 07 September 2015 06:25:45PM 4 points [-]

As others have pointed out traditional liberalism and "live and let live" long predates post-modernism. On the other hand, the recent surge of "liberalism" really anti-nominalism masquerading as liberalism. Is caused by the "no objective truth" attitude of post modernism.

Comment author: ike 07 September 2015 06:43:07PM 0 points [-]

On the other hand, the recent surge of "liberalism" really anti-nominalism masquerading as liberalism. Is caused by the "no objective truth" attitude of post modernism.

So you agree with him? In that case, what could you show me that will convince me of this?

Comment author: gjm 08 September 2015 09:51:52AM 0 points [-]

anti-nominalism

Do you mean antinomianism?

(If so, I think your characterization of it is obviously wrong; there are plenty of moral principles there, even if you find them extremely bad moral principles.)