cognitive relativism

File: 1489918463075.png (47KB, 500x430px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x430px

bump

give me a brief summary

>>2568389
from what I've read so far, basically the concept of "truth" is held in the same regards as the concept of "morality" as far as moral relativism goes, in that truth-value is held within context of an individual or social perspective, and I believe that supra-sense perception objectivity does not exist within this view.

I've done some reading on it and I feel like I have all of the pieces but can't figure out how they fit together, hoping someone can hold my hand a little bit who knows what they are talking about. I wouldn't care much, but from my understanding cognitive relativism is gaining a lot of traction in professional academia.

>>2568577
Seem like a slippery slope. After all, if you tell someone something and the flat out lie about it knowing it's a lie than no way it's the truth.

File: 4245.png (182KB, 481x511px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 481x511px

bump

Basically this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekantavada
Pragmatic truth is the only way to go, if you follow evolution, you know we evolved cognition from interacting with the world around us, and that evolution doesn't have to be accurate it just needs to continue.but we do know what we are capable of discerning is sign of objective reality, and truth of the interpretant can be reasoned. What the interpretant is depends on interaction with the same world as evolution, as cognition devolps from information being sensed from the external world, it can be reasoned in terms of our sensation of the external world.

>>2568577
Look up group think.

>>2569868
truth being composed of points of view suffers from the problem of being dependent on beings with points of view, though. if there were no conscious beings, there would be no truths by such a definition.