Abstract

The original Two Cultures debate has been told and retold as a struggle for the moral high ground; the entitlement to define ‘culture’ and especially the route to understanding humanity. Later skirmishes and attempts to define a ‘Third culture’ snatched elements of these and the battleground shifted, with the strangely playground-sounding claims that science had ‘won’. However I will argue that more interesting features of the debate were the underlying assumptions about epistemology; how can we, and should we, proceed in understanding our world and experience, and how sixty years of intellectual and cultural developments in many fields illuminate profoundly new and apparently incompatible discourses. This wide-ranging argument will necessarily be superficial but my purpose is to draw attention to what I regard as central concerns of twenty-first century lay and expert epistemologies and why they matter.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call