I'm with you on this. At the same time I keep getting confronted by the apparent reality that the idea of a shared epistemic universe seems to be in dire straits. I repeatedly run into old colleagues and classmates who live in a radically different informational environment from me and a more select group of friends. Not having a shared reality makes it hard to agree on what a fact is. It often seems to come down to "You have your reality and I have my reality". There'll be a pause and then if not a clear statement, at least a strong hint "...and my reality is right". I'm not at all sure how you work around that.
I'm with you on this. At the same time I keep getting confronted by the apparent reality that the idea of a shared epistemic universe seems to be in dire straits. I repeatedly run into old colleagues and classmates who live in a radically different informational environment from me and a more select group of friends. Not having a shared reality makes it hard to agree on what a fact is. It often seems to come down to "You have your reality and I have my reality". There'll be a pause and then if not a clear statement, at least a strong hint "...and my reality is right". I'm not at all sure how you work around that.
a couple of lives ago I made this same point, but spending way more words than you did (https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-09-23/debate-moderators-cannot-allow-the-candidates-to-twist-the-facts). thanks for saying it this clearly.
Oh I'm glad you think so. I have been working on getting this point down to its simplest form. Great piece btw.