So confusing, those Dutch culture wars. Leftists like Gramsci appear on the right, and rightists like Schmitt appear well on the left. Progressive minds, traditionally skeptical of mainstream knowledge, now turn to “science”. In their structuralist, supranational struggle, the right wing hooligans borrow eagerly from the Marxists.

But it can get even crazier.

in Defense Van Ongord Nederland against the NPO’s application to revoke this broadcaster’s broadcasting license calls Arnold Karskens and his associates as witnesses for accused intellectuals who are often known in their circles as relative left-wing irritants.

Through the lawyer ON! We read that “there is no clear distinction from the philosophy of science between fact and opinion.” Yes, because “epistemologically” there are “very few facts”. Here they are: “Mathematics (1 +1 = 2)” and “observations” as simple as: There are ten people in a square.” The rest is interpretation or opinion. Philosopher Thomas Kuhn already knew: what is truth depends on one’s own framework or model your.

what the hell? Do hackers suddenly no longer believe in the harsh truths about urbanization and the like, which they love to beat on the ears with? The broadcaster is under heavy criticism for spreading “misinformation” and “incorrect information”. But – good pooh! So these facts are just opinions?

You begin to understand it when you read who picked this for them: “Professor Kletter”, a regular on The Announcer. The NPO makes a “naive” distinction between facts and opinions, Concludes In two lavishly long sections reports.

witty. Is this former Leiden legal philosopher now advocating that only facts are relative, which he has relentlessly argued for two decades as postmodern nonsense?

Because we don’t just talk about science. Moral judgments are as universal as gravity, Cliteur wrote in this paper in 2000. “Can’t physics be compared to ethics? In fact: moral rules also pretend to have universal validity.”

Well, the operation of natural law is something very different from the content of the standard, but it is a good one. also in his Encyclopedia of Legal Sciences Cliteur deals extensively with cultural relativism. Students must get rid of it immediately.

Yes, but what is it now? Are Ongehoord Nederland’s moral claims and judgments exactly like gravity, or are they the opinions of a group that others, especially non-profit organizations, should steer clear of?

if A true sophist, Cliteur unerringly recognizes the nonprofit’s weak point: intentional pluralism. And yes, to get your broadcast license, you want to play the relative.