i support free speech thing, but i disagree with him very strongly epistemologically. The postmodenists get it right when they say that we can never be sure that we have achieved reality. We can only have models and er and try to read the world through them. This is something that scient s have come up with. And ta, this is a different kind of post modenism. It's not that there's nothing good in post modern thought at all. It's that there's nothing original in it which isn't also claimed by a more rigorous way of thinking about things.
Have you heard that language is violence and that science is sexist? Have you read that certain people shouldn’t practice yoga or cook Chinese food? Or been told that being obese is healthy, that there is no such thing as biological sex, or that only white people can be racist? Are you confused by these ideas, and do you wonder how they have managed so quickly to challenge the very logic of Western society?
In this wide-ranging conversation Helen Pluckrose recounts the evolution of the dogma that informs these ideas, from its coarse origins in French postmodernism to its refinement within activist academic fields. Today this dogma is recognizable as much by its effects, such as cancel culture and social-media dogpiles, as by its tenets, which are all too often embraced as axiomatic in mainstream media: knowledge is a social construct; science and reason are tools of oppression; all human interactions are sites of oppressive power play; and language is dangerous.