The cool thing about hearing Bonevac describe any thinker, idea or argument is that he has really put in the time and effort to charitably understand that thinker, idea, or argument. This is a truly remarkable virtue, and seeing it on display in these videos is quite inspiring, as it provides a laudable role model to emulate. Great stuff.
I think that one of the most interesting ideas of Gadamer is his view that prejudice is necessary part of human’s understanding and may both serve both positive and negative role in scientific inquiry.
Evolutionary Theory, I think, is the place for such inquiry. It may be that survival of the "fittest" requires such prejudice. That racism, sexism, tribalism, and any discrimination upto and including aesthetic choice is genetically built in. It may well be that modern opinions and legal judgements concerning discrimination go against the "science" of Evolution. It is yet to be ascertained if our understanding of genes gives us any clear, complete and correct rules to give humanity a say in the manipulation of genes. Manipulation that also means manipulation of discrimination in the form of manipulation of morals.
What is the difference between meaning and "scientific measurement"? Is it just the difference between the different coherencies of language and math? Are math and language servants of different purposes? Purposes at odds or parallel? Does it matter? Is understanding more than language and math? Is music coherent? Is there a quantum of meaning? As coherent as a quantum measurement, or is a quantum of meaning beyond even language?
