Which brings up some interesting questions about the limits of the radical methodology. To what extent can one overcome real differences simply by acting as if they didn't exist? Is that a worthwhile effort or is it ultimately stacking up further problems along the line?
My instinct is to say that one should never base anything on something one knows to be untrue, but maybe occasionally by doing that you can get through to something new that would otherwise been impossible, and from there you can start to find a fairer outcome that is based on truth. Hmm. This would probably be more interesting if there were some real life examples but I don't have time to think of any.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-21 07:54 am (UTC)My instinct is to say that one should never base anything on something one knows to be untrue, but maybe occasionally by doing that you can get through to something new that would otherwise been impossible, and from there you can start to find a fairer outcome that is based on truth. Hmm. This would probably be more interesting if there were some real life examples but I don't have time to think of any.