The ‘market’ between the two ends of the spectrum seems to be necessary to preserve the value of either, without either going off the deep end into sophistry, pseudoscience, and outright deceit.
Source date (UTC): 2019-12-06 14:21:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202956243335299073
Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s I’d love to have this conversation, because I’m frustrated by the conflict between continental success at a ‘secular theology’ using philosophy (pedagogy) vs with jurisprudence and science (decidability). Must we retain multiple literatures from empathic to analytic? Appears so.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s I’d love to have this conversation, because I’m frustrated by the conflict between continental success at a ‘secular theology’ using philosophy (pedagogy) vs with jurisprudence and science (decidability). Must we retain multiple literatures from empathic to analytic? Appears so.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834
Leave a Reply