Hi Sean, thanks very much for your arguments. Quite interesting. May I
ask a question about the conclusion? If you suggest to be careful about
this:
some hindrances, the concept of 'scientific consensus' still exists and
there still is, in the majority of situations, ways to differentiate
facts from misinformation.
argument by Daniel, and write this:
I used to think the anarcho-capitalists and Right-situationists had stolen left
critiques of science for their campain=gns; but no. The difference is that they
DO assert that their statements are accurate accounts of the world. One way to
recognise misonformation is the absolute certainty of those who broadcast it
that it is indeed a truth about the world.
you seem to assume that there still is a way to differentiate facts from
misinformation. One condition for truth is for instance, that it is
presented without absolute certainty.
Looks like a contradiction. I thus assume that I missed something. Can
you give me a hint?
--
Liebe Grüße,
Christian Swertz
http://www.swertz.at
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: [email protected]
