I’m not interested in what the dictionary says or a textbook definition I’m interested in your personal distinction between the two ideas. How do you decide to put an idea in one category versus the other? I’m not interested in the abstract concepts like ‘objective truth’ I want to know how it works in real life for you.

  • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’m a Marxist-Leninist, so the dialectical theory of knowledge. What starts as ideas are tested and confirmed or denied in reality, which then sharpens ideas to be retested and confirmed or denied in reality again, in a spiral. Ideas come from real, material conditions, and it is through this cycle that theory meets practice, sharpening each more effectively.

    • an_onanist@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      What about the ideas that can be neither confirmed nor denied like the existence of extraterrestrial life or a machine of 100% efficiency?

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      What’s Marxism have to do with it? Sounds exactly like the scientific method to me. Applying it to politics is an unnecessary step in this discussion.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        How familiar are you with Dialectical Materialism? That’s a Marxist conception, very similar to the scientific method. Marx wasn’t just an advocate for Socialized production and eventually Communism out of any moral superiority to Capitalism, but because he applied Dialectical and Historical Materialist analysis to Capitalism to predict where it was headed: monopoly and centralized syndicates, ripe for siezure and public planning.

        The Dialectical theory of knowledge is similar to an endless refinement and spiral of the scientific method.