Thread by @Quinnae_Moon

Daily reminder that "socially constructed" does not mean "fake."

I swear to the gods, this is going to have to be carved on my tombstone at this rate.

To say something is "socially constructed" is to make a claim about its origins (in human consciousness), not its reality. Money is socially constructed, but one still has to pay taxes on pain of penalty; the consequences are real, money is *functionally* real.

Consider a building, something whose solidity would be the very definition of 'real' for most people. It was designed and built by humans, but the end result is both meaningful and physically real. It occurs in the universe, its existence is undeniable. And it was constructed.

A *social* construct is that, but for human relations. It is a claim about the origins of those relations, and a claim that they are therefore within our power to change. It does not mean that a 'construct' is a fiction that can be ignored.

While race has no real biological basis, only a fool would deny the solidity of its impact on people's lives. It cannot be wished away, and it is ignored at one's peril. And it's still a social construct. As real as it gets.

Now, what about maths and science? Surely not these. In terms of what these arts describe, no, the underlying laws of the universe and the fundamental functions of math are not socially constructed. They were discovered rather than invented by humans. However...

The manner by which we arrive at those truths and the perspective we take on the universe that leads to their discovery, what we do with the information, how we disseminate it, what culture grows around its study, all these are constructed.

Consider Ted Chiang's "Story of Your Life." It's on my mind tonight and it furnishes us with an ideal example of what I mean. A critical revelation in the story hinges on Dr. Banks discovering that the alien Heptapods conceive of science in a radically different way from humans

Chiang uses the example of Fermat's principle of least time to illustrate how a fundamental truth about the universe is arrived at differently by each species. What is simple science to us is complex to Heptapods and vice versa because of how each species conceives of time.

The principle is indeed there to be discovered. It's real. But the perspective that led to that truth, what becomes codified as the science of it, is forged by sapience. We construct the road to timeless truth.

This passage from "Story of Your Life" makes the point plain. This is why sci-fi is amazing, by the way. It can distil the headiest ideas into an easily understandable form.

But you see the point. One truth, two possible roads to it. The idea that a social constructionist perspective denies truth, or denies the revelations of good science is a wild ideologue's fever dream. SC merely gives humans credit for authorship where it's due.

Now, I'm sure I'll *never* have to give this lecture again.