Everything Is Controversial

Philosophical topics and all the subcategories they break down to, including epistemology, religion, logic, and politics, are not divided into controversial issues and issues that are not or could not be controversial.  Everything at all is or at least could be a matter of intense controversy--even the fact that logical axioms must be true because they cannot possibly be false is something that irrational people not only could reject or deny, but it is something that many people have attacked in my presence, even as they go on to spout more contradictory bullshit and unverifiable possibilities instead of just affirming that which could never be false.

It is folly to act as if it is just the historical evidence for the life of Jesus, the safety of vaccines, the motives behind the American Civil War, the nature of morality, or the public attitudes towards sexuality are the only controversial things, much less the most controversial topics a person could think about or discuss!  Each of these is actually quite philosophically tame in some ways compared to the more foundational matters of logical axioms and base epistemology.  This is where the greatest controversies arise, for this is what nothing at all could be true without; logical axioms like the inherent truth of sound deductive reasoning and the existence of truth itself hold up all other aspects of reality.

Somehow, controversy is more commonly perceived to be associated with often random contemporary issues that are rarely as foundational or important in other ways as the masses appear to think.  For instance, whether humanity is dooming itself by exploring artificial intelligence is a subject that has some important ramifications for human life, but neither those who foolishly assume that artificial intelligence will lead to the downfall of humankind or those who foolishly assume that artificial intelligence could never backfire on human wellbeing could be correct without the inescapable axiom that truth exists.  This fact is more abstract than the basic concept of artificial intelligence, yes, yet it is more vital than the latter could ever be.

Bring up the inherent truth of logical axioms, though, and people who truly believe things which have to stand on these axioms if they are correct will dismiss or trivialize the necessary truths at the very core of epistemology and metaphysics.  Everything is or can be highly controversial when only some people are genuine rationalists.  In such a community, that which cannot be false could be attacked or doubted the moment popularity calls for it and that which cannot be true (logical contradictions) could be put in the spotlight of belief at any time.  The kind of controversy common in mainstream subjects of debate is frequently just there because of mistaken understanding of the issue or an exaggeration of its importance.

Seeing past mere perceptions and fallacies is how to get to the heart of an issue.  It just is not likely that many others will join you.  There are things that cannot be false, and there are things that cannot be true or even possible, and any rational person would not dispute these truths.  Unfortunately, there is nothing that an unwilling, irrationalistic mind cannot distort, disbelieve, or fight.  Controversy is not a true indicator of how epistemologically up in the air an issue is, for anyone who is not a rationalist could ignore or manipulate logically provable facts as long as they have the desire to.  What controversy reveals is how diverse worldviews are and how everything that does not align with rationalism is at worst inherently false and at best hopelessly unverifiable.