Here's a guest post by Davida, following up our post on the causes of transphobia. Using the approach of philosopher and computer scientist Bernardo Kastrup Davida maps the logical and rhetorical tricks used by homophobes (and by implication transphobes) in their desire to defend their own beliefs. This way of arguing is also found in science.
By Davida
In his book, Meaning in Absurdity, the Dutch philosopher Bernardo Kastrup makes an argument against a metaphysical position known as realism. Kastrup’s opening words, “This book is an experiment: an attempt to use logic to expose the absurd foundations of logic.”
In his argument, he employs research from quantum physics to support his critique. An alternative presentation is offered here, which hopefully will illustrate his points in a less technical manner. However, it will be without the strong empirical support his argument offered.
His critique of realism is directed at its reliance upon bivalence logic (either, or), strong objectivity (alleged facts, independent of context or conditions), hidden variables (alleged causes, outside of that which can be known) and faith (belief treated as fact).
A dialogue with a homophobe
So, imagine the following scene. Bill is talking across a backyard fence with his neighbor, Sam, about their new neighbors down the street.
Sam: We don’t need people like them in the neighborhood.
Bill: What do you mean? What kind of people are they?
Sam: Isn’t obvious? Two men are buying a house together and claiming to be one another’s spouse.
Bill: What’s the big deal? It is pretty common these days.
Sam: I’ll tell you what the big deal is. It isn’t natural. It goes against nature. It is against the natural order of the world. (realism claim implying strong objectivity)
Bill: How so?
