Talk:Pluralism

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Philosophy

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Untitled

Need to redirect all the "what links here" to the appropriate article. Madmedea 16:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for Critical pluralism

I've moved it here:

"Robert Stecker, "Art Interpretation", Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 52 (1994), pp. 193"

Thanks, Drum guy (talk) 23:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-pluralism

I've noticed that the term "anti-pluralism" has been used by certain philosophical or polemical writers. Perhaps it could deserve a stub, along with appropriate sources of course. [1] [2] [3] [4] ADM (talk) 12:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperpluralism

Hyperpluralism should not redirect here, it deserves its own page. 173.66.29.100 (talk) 16:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as someone writes an article on it, we will link it! See Hyperpluralism - history for previous content (from 2005. single sentence). See also wikt:hyperpluralism. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not encylopedic

This has suddenly become a wiktionary entry. What happened? (20040302 (talk))

create the page: Pluralist naturalism

Many (not all; some are monistic physicalists) atheists are pluralists exactly like theists, due to the separation of parallel universes, the mathematically incompatible non-parallelizable universes, the separate experiencing amongst individuals, the different logically achievable Deutschian constructors, etc. To be honest these deep questions are open in science. Watch David Deutsch on YouTube. Due to causopermeability and identity [common reality monism], different orders of magnitude and phenomena not only interact, but are part of the same overall wavefunction/reality; but we cannot say the same for everything like the mathematically incompatible non-parallelizable universes. Atheists are either naturalistic monists or naturalistic pluralists (see: metaphysical naturalism, monism, pluralism, physicalism). Atheism and theism are very close because: 1. atheists believe in brain function and have neuroscientific data theists have forged pseudoscience on this 2. atheists support works on the quantum foundations = endocontextualization of the universe theists have ancient myths with causal gaps and biases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralism_(philosophy) Thus atheism and theism have the exact same principles (according to a negligible minority of thinkers; but we can overlook this). OK, theists make few puny methodological mistakes.

But who are we to judge?

_____________

Metaphysical pluralism and monism might sound stupid or weird to you, but they're open questions in science and philosophy. According to some categorization methods in philosophy (too many exist) atheism and theism are closer together under the umbrella term "specific metaphysical worldviews" than agnosticism. But many philosophical categorizations exist. Antisupernaturalism/antitranscendentalism is hypernymic/hypernymous/superordinate to atheism because it specifically rejects anything supernatural/transcendental.

____________

Meta means after, but as a prefix means also same nature of thing applied to itself (metamathematics = mathematical analyses of mathematics, metatheory = theory of a theory, metajoke = joke about a joke or jokes etc.). We need more works on the meta-analysis and contextualization of absolute rationalism (affirmativism for atheism which is a negationism; we need to work on the affirmativisms = the solutions). 85.72.174.161 (talk) 22:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]