On our fundamental choice between traditional empirical science or some kind of extremism (like cladistics and particle physics)

The interesting thing about sorting is that there are two principally different kinds of sorting: plain and orthogonal (as I have tried to explain in many posts on this blog). The interesting thing about this fact is that it influences how we talk about things, since our words sort.

These two kinds of sorting actually offer us only two options in discussions about something that is outside of the discussion itself (ie, isn’t meta-discussional): to be ambiguous or to be self-contradictory. The option of being unambiguous and consistent is simply not given.

In the choice between those two options, traditional empirical science (ie, objectivity) is ambiguous, whereas all kinds of extremisms (ie, subjectivity) are self-contradictory. Between these two approaches is there thus nothing.

Our fundamental choice is thus between traditional empirical science or some kind of extremism (like cladistics and particle physics). The choice of finding a single unambiguous truth is simply not given.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s