Thank you so much for your interest.
It’s September, 2021, and we find ourselves in a global battle-to-the-death between constructivism and empiricism, with reality sitting on the side of empiricism, and corporate-funded pharmaceutical research “studies” sitting on the side of constructivism.
As we saw with the move from modern to post-modern, society sometimes unravels itself when science, especially physics, broadcasts claims about the fundamental nature of reality. Relativism, for example, is real, but that does not logically translate into equal probability of all outcomes, nor does it translate into equal standing for all perspectives and opinions as models of reality.
The role of language, as I'm sure you're aware, is key to maintaining coherence between our symbolic representation of reality in the many ways we humans make those representations, but we get into trouble when we confuse our symbolic representations of reality with reality itself. So many examples come to mind: racism, sexism, agism… the unwarranted generalizations, yes. But then there’s scientism, Bayesian analysis, and CDC’s white paper on vaccine safety study protocols (which, while they publish it, CDC disavows as coming from them… masterful layering there).
It is important to understand that the empiricism embedded and ingrained into the curriculum we aim to develop can benefit from the meta-awareness provided by the history of philosophy. History is an essential part of this - not due to any inherent special value as “history” (e.g., Popper’s “The Poverty of Historicism”), but rather in providing students a context within which particular human thought models emerged and evolved. Where did all of the best ideas in philosophy come from - and how do we see them manifest in the ways that peoples have structured and operated their societies? And where have sociopathologies emerged from reliance on errant philosophies?
When these sociopathologies take hold in science, what then?
When constructivists use the tools of science to warp perception to impose their artificial realities (tobacco science, pesticide safety, etc.) - what then? Fake studies showing harm from drugs that can prevent COVID-19 deaths, the use of fatal doses and hardly anyone blinked an eye, the falsification of vaccinated rates of COVID19 by CDC… so much right there, in front of our faces.
The aim of Popular Rationalists is to teach cohorts of students - thousands of students - from all walks of life - through the process of re-stabilizing society toward the use of logic, reason and empirical reality in the formulation of policies, practices and laws.
Popular rationalism is what's happening whenever everyday people - including those without higher learning - insist that the laws, policies and practices be founded upon and remain consistent with empirical reality.
For example, at IPAK-EDU (http://ipak-edu.org), all of the classical courses in the philosophy curriculum track will be taught with the idea of comprehending past schools of thought as pave stones on a path of human awareness, leading to (hopefully) improved comprehension of ourselves, the world, and the universe around us. The courses in the Analytics track will heavily augment the Philosophy track. IPAK-EDU is for those who want the experience of a formal higher education because they love learning - but don’t really care about degrees. Courses like “How to Read and Interpret a Scientific Study” are particularly popular. Did I mention that all courses are taught live?
Please consider following this Popular Rationalism substack with a paid subscription for in-depth articles analyzing current events and putting them into proper context. There are numerous rational voices out there, and we’ll be bringing your attention to their excellent analyses in the free section. Watch for announcements, articles, and podcasts, and, of course, in-depth analyses. Oh, and please bring your friends.
Oh, and extra Dr. Jack credits for anyone who sends me alerts on typos. Like everyone else, I’m very busy, but believe that employment is health for people. One day I hope to hire a full-time editor to follow me around the web cleaning up after me.
Very truly yours,
James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, aka “Dr. Jack”
What I’m Reading Right Now
My take: If you think you’ve gone mad, no, all of this really happened.
Why Don’t They Believe Us? https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/vaccines-konstantin-kisin
IPAK-EDU LLC (Online University w/LIVE Courses)
IPAK (Research Institute)
Research Journal (Peer-Reviewed)
Is it possible for Popular Rationalism to do independent studies on the environment in East Palestine, Ohio. Those people really need help
Taking you up here on your receptivity to typo correction. Your motto--per scientiame? No. per takes the accusative, so you can, and should, have scientiam. But no 'e' That's simply not a Latin word (speaking as a Latin teacher).