It ties neatly into one of my major concerns with my piece -whether it can be interpreted as anti-rationality / a critique of empiricism (which is not the intention).
My reflexive reaction to the claim that “enlightenment is totalitarian” is fairly heavy scepticism (whereas, obviously, I lean in the opposite direction as regards to EA), so I’m curious what distinctions there are between the arguments made in Dialectic and the arguments made in my piece. I will have a read of Dialectic and think through this further.
This is a really interesting parallel—thank you!
It ties neatly into one of my major concerns with my piece -whether it can be interpreted as anti-rationality / a critique of empiricism (which is not the intention).
My reflexive reaction to the claim that “enlightenment is totalitarian” is fairly heavy scepticism (whereas, obviously, I lean in the opposite direction as regards to EA), so I’m curious what distinctions there are between the arguments made in Dialectic and the arguments made in my piece. I will have a read of Dialectic and think through this further.