• Grail (capitalised)@aussie.zoneOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t see the contradiction between soulism and anarcho-antirealism. Soulism as a term originates on the internet as anarchism which opposes natural laws. Destroying natural laws requires destroying the system that places reality above people. In other words, destroying realism.

      • Grail (capitalised)@aussie.zoneOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The truth is what we should believe. According to realists, we should believe in reality. According to realists, truth is objective. According to soulists, we should believe in whatever’s useful. According to soulists, truth is a choice and we have a responsibility to make a good choice.

        • It sounds like They describe soulists as arguing that the truth is unknowable, so believe nothing and simply use the most helpful assumptions as a guide.

          And elsewhere it sounds like They’re saying soulists delude themselves into fully believing those most helpful assumptions as objective truth

          That’s an important difference

          • Grail (capitalised)@aussie.zoneOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Soulists definitely don’t believe in an objective anything. I wrote the article, and I can’t see any part of it where I said soulists believe in an objective truth.

            Let’s take this theory into the practical. “Trans women are women.” Is that an objective truth? No, women don’t objectively exist. It’s a subjective truth. But it’s a very important subjective truth that everyone needs to agree with and genuinely believe in if we’re going to have a free society.