Once again, you are talking past anything I have ever said. X said we can know nothing, that there is a radical disjunction between reality and our minds. I hold that we make conditionally true (i.e., potentially revisable) statements about reality, and that the efficacy of reason is obvious in the course of our daily lives, not because we are infallible, but because we frequently put together observations and inferences that work, or enjoy the fruit of others in doing so. (For example, we are using computers to communicate right now).
Therefore, there are things to teach which are both interesting and useful in many subjects. Contrast this with the idea that all of our assertions are fundamentally mere social or personal constructs. Then all content is arbitrary, and there is, literally, nothing to teach, understanding teaching as a means to enhance knowledge.
Anyway, X already mentioned that her motivation was to change reality through the promotion of her viewpoint, which is what I expected. Really, you haven't a leg to stand on...... |
