In the last year, much has been written in the NNO about truth. Its shades, deficits, forgotten meanings, which in an age of uncertainty are peculiarly severe, etc. We frequently think of fact as something that metaphysically liberates. It can, however, bind, suppress, extinguish or, under certain circumstances, trigger a spiral of cynicism.
Anchor
Even 25 years ago, at a conversation in social philosophy, the leader was tired of my studies of truth. He proposed that I read Bohdan Chwedenczuk's “The Nature of Truth” and then returned to the discussion (a akin series happened to me respective times). I would not be able to quote a book in its entirety today, but I remember that my reasoning about fact was effectively anchored there and divided into 3 camps: correspondence, coherence and pragmatic.
Take-off
The first 2 approaches have a strong tendency to pull off individual fanaberies. What is actual is what agrees with reality and – in the second variant – what agrees with another actual claims. erstwhile we decision within these frameworks, the fact loop our individual, absoluteist urges. You can't say what you want, make up, fantasize, hold back, check facts, verify counterarguments, humbly mention to your freedom and see limitations. This is simply a plane that requires caution, abstinence, a distance that takes time to reflect and a willingness to admit that the another side of the dispute may be right. It does not, of course, mean to cile all conviction indefinitely – specified a life would be unbearable and actually impossible, due to the fact that the sources of cognition can be verified indefinitely. The point is to objectiveize the criteria of fairness.
On a full gas of cynicism
The situation is completely different on the basis of pragmatic concepts. There – in short – is what is applicable and working. “The full meaning of this pragmatic method is so solely that truths should have applicable consequences,” he writes in The Meaning of Truth William James, 19th-century co-founder of American pragmatism. specified an attitude creates quite a few problems, due to the fact that usefulness can have various colors, including political ones, and hence there is only a step to speculation. She takes advantage of the trampoline and does nothing about the facts. Then we enter a truly dense and dark forest, where systematic abuse is the guide. Sometimes with shame, but besides unusual jealousy, I look at people who, nothing at all, care what they truly are, who are ready to say any bullshit to play something. For the record, it's not a mistake, it happens to everyone. It is about something deeper, about an organized disregard of the facts, about the belief that the fact does not substance that it is only a defined interest. It's the arena of a free American who doesn't choke anything but profit.
Alternative Reality
It may sound like an exaggeration that I am putting pragmatism on me to pass with the truth, but I consider utility to be a key category in this arrangement (a decisively more dangerous than stupidity or incompetence). We have many examples of methodological lies: refugees, sexual minorities, economical situation, vaccines, diseases, diets, taxes, climate change, plus, of course, far-fetched narratives in election campaigns – all of this is simply a creation of alternate reality set for any profit. It is not without reason that the planet economical Forum considers disinformation as the biggest hazard in the 2 years. Of course, this is supported by AI, which produces experts and experts on everything that in texts, pictures and films can make a justification for any thesis. I realize that nothing could always be entirely certain, but this anxiety is insanely increased by the improvement of artificial intelligence.
Opportunity makes a thief, and I think AI will discover fresh layers of greed and ruthlessness within us.
I'm afraid it's not adequate to accumulate moral sense in a confrontation with greed, with a calculation of what it would be like to make money on a lie, and then build up any another brain water. So far, the remedy to the deficiency of morality was the law. present it sounds like a dream of a beheaded head.
Truth in Trouble
A friend made a gag a fewer days ago that he would have listened to the Christmas carols performed by the Scooter band. The second answered that it was actually no problem in the day of artificial intelligence. “No restrictions and it is great”, he added. We have practicality above the fact (because Scooter never recorded any Polish carol). I get the impression that the fact understood by correspondence is in expanding distress and possibly the era of pure utility is beginning. The small revolutionary thesis is that the more momentary practicality all day, the little nonsubjective truth. Doubts are not bearable, simplification with easy solutions and yes.
It would be incorrect to presume that something fresh is simply a tender, where there is restraint against each other, limiting complacency and uncritical tongue grinding. This clash has been going on for centuries. However, technology has never given the another side specified a powerful and easy-to-use weapon that fact in the spirit of pragmatic concepts is cut to its ends. erstwhile this is over, it's easy to predict.
