We know that fluidity is better than rigidity, openness is better than close-mindedness, heterodoxy more than orthodoxy, tolerance is good, intolerance is bad, etc...
But certain authors that emphasize these points to so in a Manichean way. They always seem to know exactly what the correct, heterodox position is, which is the opposite of the orthodox one (which they also know). There is never any hesitation, no doubt. We can predict exactly what they will say. There is no real epistemological humility that goes along with this championing of doubt.
The other side is always the dogmatic one, not our side.
No comments:
Post a Comment