|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|In February 20, 2013, it was proposed that this article be moved to Realism. The result of the debate was not moved.|
Coming from critical theory, this terminology is very confusing. We use the term "realist" for people who say literature should depict particular real-world instances rather than abstract universals. We use the term "idealist" for the Platonists who say you should depict universals. The two terms are in some respects the reverse of how they're used here, even though they're based on the same ancient writings. Probably this difference in terminology should be mentioned somewhere. Philgoetz (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
-- "Despite the straightforwardness of the realist position, there has been a lot of debate about what is real and what is meant by the term 'real'."
I find this statement very humorous, seeing that realism is defined by having beliefs that correspond to 'reality' or 'real life', and is constantly redefined by new observations about life by living people. Therefore, wouldn't the definition of the word 'real' always be under constant redefinition due to the fact that there are constantly new observations being made by those people?
This is the reciprocal relationship that I admire about realism - those who follow it seek to define the self and the world through an ever-maturing and self-critical self-awareness. 126.96.36.199 20:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- "Legalists were political realists who sought to attain a “rich state with powerful army” and to ensure domestic stability in an age marked by intense inter- and intra-state competition." -- That doesn't sound anything like Philosophical realism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue Mist 1 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
I added a section on realism in physics, in part because some of the articles in quantum mechanics point at this page. I hope the addition of such a section is not objectionable. Please note that the QM debate is very different than scientific realism, which is an unrelated idea. linas 15:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
hello, just a casual reader ... don't really know the formalism of the discussion pages, so I hope I'm not being rude or disruptive. A small but significant point is that Bell's theorem does not prove local realist theories are impossible. It gives an experimentally testable consequence of a theory being local and real. Quantum mechanics has so far failed this test (and therefore seems to be either non-local, or not real). But the accuracy of these experiments is still debated. While quite convincing, Bell's theorem is far from a proof 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Daniel
It might be possible to give a list of some philosophers who have been prominent in the realist-antirealist debate (on the realist side), but it would need to be made clear that, at least as far as contemporary analytic philosophy is concerned, most philosophers can be considered realists. It would be possible to give a list of prominent anti-realists, but this might be better off on a different page. Many use the term, but without a univocal definition, this is an amorphous category.Willg1000 18:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Just noticed a typical example of cite-ism: "It can also be argued that the 'realism' of physics is a much more specific notion than general philosophical realism." It not only can argued, but it is predominant view of those working in this area. But it is backed up by cite of Travis Norsen, someone who for good reason not even is important enough to a Wikipedia article. Without further knowledge, a reader knowing Norsen, but not the current discussions in philosophy of physics would be inclined to believe, that it is a fringe view in this area... --Pjacobi 07:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
"This particular dispute over realism is largely moot in contemporary philosophy, and has been for centuries." The dispute in question (between realism, nominalism and conceptualism in regards to Universals) has been rendered moot, it would appear. Unfortunately, the reader is left to decide for him/herself just which of those three came out on top. Perhaps the author would deign to enlighten we poor lesser beings?
In all seriousness, while I get the impression this is quite obvious to those more familiar with the standard presentation of philosophy, shouldn't the implied answer be made explicit in an encyclopedia context? Cyclone77 (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Contention with postmodernism?
"In recent times, debates concerning realism have become quite contentious due mostly in part to the influence of postmodernism"
Realism in religion section
Hello, i have just added a short "realism in religion" section because i had previously linked to this article's page while working on improving the Church of Reality page. As far as i know, the Church of Reality is the only religion founded upon the principles of philosophical realism -- but i would love to hear of any others, if known, with an eye toward including them in Wikipedia as well. Thanks! catherine yronwode, not logged in, and therefore posting as "64" 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- Is this an "owned" article? The one-paragraph "Realism in religion" section was summarily deleted 2 days after being written with no explanatory edit-comment and with no discussion here. That is not standard operating policy for an open-source encyclopedia, in my experience. I am reinserting the section. If someone has a problem with it, they ought to discuss it here. Thanks! catherine yronwode, not logged in, and therefore posting as "64" 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
"Realism is contrasted with idealism"
Not necessarily, many forms of ontological idealism are compatible with realism. I'd suggest removing this, too general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
From the article: "realism is contrasted with idealism."
No, it is not. There is nothing about idealism that is opposed to the realism. But it seems implicit that realism+idealism=theism, whereas anti-realism+idealism=solipsism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2E24:AA0:5194:7E86:698E:DD8C (talk) 18:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC)