Post #1581610
2025-08-06 21:02 UTC
@rechelon I am not completely ignorant of the debate. I find it much easier to accept someone identifying as an anti-realist to point out the underlying absurdity of the framing than to accept the pomposity of identifying as a guardian and arbitrator of "reality."
But, I think its disingenuous to brush off Rands contribution to that discourse. She was involved in it, she named her philosophy that to reflect her position on the matter.
Replies (1)
-
@rechelon@mastodon.social 2025-08-06 21:18
@Montaagge We could be here all day naming realists and antirealists and the passion by which they prosecuted various positions within each umbrella. Rand, like many others that could be named on both sides, was pretty much absent in the 80s and 90s Science Wars. You can whine about "pomposity" -- I have subchapters addressing both the antirealist charges that realism is too arrogant and that it's too humble -- but saying *there is* a reality isn't the same thing as claiming to be its arbiter.