Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternCanadaKing
Is this thread still about Jordan Peterson?
The guy may say the occasional thing that makes sense, but his epistemology makes no sense. He doesn't believe in objective truth. He defines truth as being what is of greatest utility in terms of survival. I can't even begin to think how this would even be a useful conception of truth, let alone a 'true' one.
I find it difficult to take any of his conclusions seriously if this is how he sees the world. It speaks to someone who would easily allow bias into their analysis.
|
Only mathematicians deal with truths, everything else is fuzzy data paired with subjective reasoning, the whole field of medicine is essentially guesswork because they're dealing with incredibly complex systems and have to use bad data (ie - there's a whole of guessing that takes place between "I have a bad cough" and having a definitive cause for the cough). When you get into the world of clinical psychology you're so far removed from any definitive version of truth that you have to define it yourself and having your version of the truth be orientated towards positive results seems like a pretty reasonable stance for someone in that position to take.