NP no facts only interpretations

[Doug Millison]

"jbor":
Bauerlein is
referring to the idea that language, and thus "knowledge", is a "social
construct". This is a recognition which underpins academic endeavour in all
fields of the humanities nowadays: philosophy, sociology, anthropology,
linguistics, history, psychology, literature etc etc.

Sounds like religious belief to me, accepting dogma as truth and blindly
refusing to debate it. I think it's obvious where Pynchon comes down on that
particular practice. Bauerlein has obviously had more than a view
conversations with people who argue like "jbor".

"This is why it is a mistake to treat social constructionism as preached in
the academy as a philosophy. Though the position sounds like an
epistemology, filled with glib denials of objectivity, truth, and facts
backed up by in-the-know philosophical citations ("As Nietzsche says. . ."),
its proponents hold those beliefs most unphilosophically. When someone holds
a belief philosophically, he or she exposes it to arguments and evidence
against it, and tries to mount arguments and evidence for it in return. But
in academic contexts, constructionist ideas are not open for debate. They
stand as community wisdom, articles of faith. ... If canons of logic do not
apply to constructionist thinking, on what does it base its assertions? If
all knowledge is bound by time and place, how does constructionist
persuasion work outside its time and place? If discovery and justification
are one, how does constructionist inquiry justify itself? ... "
http://www.bu.edu/partisanreview/archive/2001/2/bauerlein.html