Looking at Steve Fuller’s Book (2020) “A Player’s Guide to the Post-Truth Condition” (Part 18 of 26)

0172 One more point about chapter ten.

The author discloses an amazing coincidence.

In 1996, Fuller publishes an article in the same issue of the journal, Social Text, as Alan Sokal’s infamous fraud, marking the start of the so-called Sokal Hoax.  The admission is delightful, occurring as it does in a discussion that intimates that the relativist one’s interscope founding potential is the will1a, not the truth1a.

0173 Here is a picture of the interscope for the relativist one in the Fourth Battle Involving Enlightenment Gods: Empirio-Normative Domination within the Post-Truth Condition (1989 to present).

Yes, reason3a,1a is the normal context of the intellect3a operating on the potential of the will1a.  In our current Lebenswelt,we (humans) reason3a,1a and come up with diverse facts and claims2a.  These opinions are selectively observed and measured in order to produce the psychometric models2b that will be validated by the post-modern university3b through certification2b.  Certification2b is put into perspective by opportunities1c to success2c.  But, success2c for the scientismist one3c is not the same as what the person on the scrappy player level3a,1a thinks it2a is

0174 The title of chapter eleven is “Why Ignorance – Not Knowledge – Is The Key To Justice in the Post-Truth Condition”.

Fuller associates the ignorance position with John Rawls (1921-2002 AD).  Rawls is regarded as the greatest philosopher of the social democratic welfare state.

Fuller associates the knowledge position with Robert Nozick (1938-2002).  Nozick is regarded as the most philosophically sophisticated defender of modern libertarianism.

He then plays one off of the other, arriving at the conclusion in the chapter’s title.

0175 For this examiner, Fuller inadvertently re-capitulates an empirio-normative judgment in the following fashion.

0176 Yes, Fuller takes the opportunity1c to express his expertise3b.

In terms of psychometric models, justice is value2.  Rawls associates with the socialist nested form.  Nozick associates with the capitalist nested form.  For Rawls, in the normal context of order3, fairness1 provides the best righteousness for justice2.  For Nozick, in the normal context of what the market can deliver3, imposing a price… er… cost1 is the best avenue to repair justice2.  Rawls wants to impose a veil of ignorance2, thus assuring fairness1.  Nozick wants to repair2,thus assuring reconciliation1.

0177 Of course, my own associations cast Fuller as an expert3b within the very system that he is (theoretically) calling out.

Yet, that is not his intent.

Such is the revelation embedded within his work.The very stones cry out.