“we see diverging narratives hardening into impenetrable “realities” for their adherents”…”the breakdown of shared legitimation”. And for us to become a truth seeker, “prioritize evidence, reason, and open debate”.
It is amazing to hear what one friend calls vapid, while another’s perspective is incorrigibly illogical, and yet to not hear well-reasoned debate with ascertainable facts that can be indisputable when challenged. In simplest terms, it’s a mess.
THIS is the apocalypse for grown-ups; not fire and brimstone, but the slow disintegration of consensus reality under the acid rain of algorithmic bullshit. Berger and Luckmann warned us: if enough people agree that a lie is true, the lie becomes true in practice. The world doesn’t end with explosions; it ends when half of it refuses to believe in gravity because “that’s just your opinion.”
We’re not living in an “information age.” We’re living in an interpretation crisis. Every TikTok prophet and AI hallucination is busy rewriting the social contract one delusion at a time, while the rest of us are still arguing over whether facts have feelings. The danger isn’t ignorance; it’s infinite, personalized epistemology.
The antidote? Radical curiosity and shared reality maintenance. We have to rebuild the scaffolding of truth together, brick by agonizing brick, or the last thing we agree on will be that nothing means anything.
"The “collapse of truth” isn’t merely about people believing false things; it’s about the erosion of the shared epistemological framework—the agreed-upon ways of knowing—that makes objective truth itself a meaningful concept."
Somewhat ironically, the postmodern academic left has led that erosion, which in turn has been successfully weaponized by the right
“we see diverging narratives hardening into impenetrable “realities” for their adherents”…”the breakdown of shared legitimation”. And for us to become a truth seeker, “prioritize evidence, reason, and open debate”.
It is amazing to hear what one friend calls vapid, while another’s perspective is incorrigibly illogical, and yet to not hear well-reasoned debate with ascertainable facts that can be indisputable when challenged. In simplest terms, it’s a mess.
this was very insightful thank you very much for this post 👏🏽
Epistemologies also include imagination and intuition nb Iain McGuilchrist.
THIS is the apocalypse for grown-ups; not fire and brimstone, but the slow disintegration of consensus reality under the acid rain of algorithmic bullshit. Berger and Luckmann warned us: if enough people agree that a lie is true, the lie becomes true in practice. The world doesn’t end with explosions; it ends when half of it refuses to believe in gravity because “that’s just your opinion.”
We’re not living in an “information age.” We’re living in an interpretation crisis. Every TikTok prophet and AI hallucination is busy rewriting the social contract one delusion at a time, while the rest of us are still arguing over whether facts have feelings. The danger isn’t ignorance; it’s infinite, personalized epistemology.
The antidote? Radical curiosity and shared reality maintenance. We have to rebuild the scaffolding of truth together, brick by agonizing brick, or the last thing we agree on will be that nothing means anything.
https://twvme.substack.com/p/ewr-part-1-welcome-to-the-battlespace - Epistemic War - 101
"The “collapse of truth” isn’t merely about people believing false things; it’s about the erosion of the shared epistemological framework—the agreed-upon ways of knowing—that makes objective truth itself a meaningful concept."
Somewhat ironically, the postmodern academic left has led that erosion, which in turn has been successfully weaponized by the right
10,000 thanks for bringing this important work back up to the reading surface here in the present moment.