Pluralism (philosophy)
When pluralism is called in philosophy positions that accept a variety of fundamental and irreducible levels in the world. Pluralisms thus differ from the one monistic theories such as physicalism which holds the level of physical action as the only basic. Pluralist theories differ, however, also from dualism, which starts from two basic levels - the physical and the mental.
Pluralist theories often vary greatly in their metaphysical and ontological background assumptions. While ontological pluralisms postulate a variety of basic entities in the world, reject relativistic pluralisms from the idea of an ontology and maintain a variety of descriptive systems or language games. " Pluralism " can not be perceived as a unified position, therefore, in philosophy.
Logical pluralism
Immanuel Kant commented on pluralism: " The logical egoist considers it unnecessary to consider its judgment on the minds of others;. the same as if this tasting stone ( criterium veritatis externum ) not in need " " The egoism can be opposed only the pluralism that is the way of thinking: not to be regarded as the whole world in his self- dealing, but as a mere citizen of the world and to behave. " " If you go with those of other compares his insights and from the ratio of line with other reason decides the truth, which is the logical pluralism. " Kant called a unilateral scholars as Cyclops. "He is an egoist of science, and there it is still a necessary eye, which makes that he still sees his subject from the point of view of other people ... "
Ontological pluralism
Ontological pluralisms characterized by the adoption of a variety of basic entities. They explain that there is not only fundamental physical objects, properties and events. Rather existed in the world, numerous non physical entities, such as awareness, numbers, meanings, moral or aesthetic properties. A modern form of the ontological pluralism is found for the philosopher of science John Dupré. Comparable are also theories of "strong emergence".
Against such inflationary ontology is often argued with Occam's razor. Under " Occam's Razor " refers to the principle of ontological parsimony, which states that one should postulate as few basic entities. Ontological pluralists can cite against this objection, that Occam's Razor is only applicable if ontologically more economical alternatives are available that have the same explanatory power. However, this was not the case, as monistic or dualistic theories of the existence of numerous entities could not be equitable.
Another objection to ontological pluralisms is that the same difficulties as in dualism. Against the dualism is often argued that he can not explain the causal interaction between physical and mental states. This problem of mental causation is applicable to pluralism in a generalized variant: If there are many non-physical entities, you have to explain where and how they interact with the physical world. However, such an explanation could not be given because the physical events themselves have always been purely physical causes, therefore, was not a place for non-physical causality. Ontological pluralists respond to this objection by claiming that are not to be found anywhere sufficient physical causes, or explain that physical determinism is not in conflict with non-physical causes.
Relativistic pluralism
The idea of a relativistic pluralism is closely linked with the work of Nelson Goodman. Goodman argues in his work that the idea of a world in itself is meaningless, because you can not abstract from the human perspective and a world could describe the perspectives beyond. Instead, there were a variety of perspectives, such as the perspective of physics, aesthetics or the mental.
However, if you can not step behind each of these perspectives, the idea of a world beyond human perspectives is pointless. It must be recognized, therefore, that each description is in line with its own world. As these worlds arise only through the active use of language of the people, one can speak of a world production. The persuasive power of the relativistic pluralism depends essentially on the coherence of relativism. The postulate of several worlds created by humans is questioned often critical.
Pragmatic pluralism
William James developed the knowledge position of pragmatism against the then widely idealistic positions. He would like the fact of the often contradictory experiences meet and looking for practical, generally convincing ways out, because pluralism is relativism, ie Loss of general binding public rationality. Why these are compromise and mediation inseparable from the philosophy of pluralism. Not only from the abstract thinking, but also from the practical life are important considerations for evaluating philosophical ideas and their consequences derive.
Hilary Putnam, who refers to his later philosophy as "pragmatic pluralism " and " pluralism term " attempted to formulate an intermediate position between ontological and relativistic pluralism. Putnam rejects an inflationary ontology and asserts that one should not accept a plurality of basic entities, but a variety of perspectives. However, this perspective pluralism does not lead, according to Putnam for generating a plurality of worlds, as claimed by Goodman. Rather, there is only one world that can be described in various ways.
Putnam attempts to clarify this position by the phenomenon of conceptual relativity. The conceptual relativity Putnam discussed by the following example: He encourages you to imagine a universe with three indivisible individuals ( see figure). Now one could give to the question of how many objects are in the universe, different answers. Is it about the view that only individuals are objects, are now in the universe three objects: X1, X2, X3. Claimed you, however, that also represent conjunctions of individuals objects, so there are seven objects: X1, X2, X3, X1 X2, X1 X3, X2 X3, X1 X2 X3. Putnam argues that there is no correct answer to the question, how many objects actually exist in the world. The answer depends on the perspective and the concept of system used. Different equal conceptual systems are available.
After Putnam shows the conceptual relativity, that there are different perspectives on the world that are equally legitimate and fundamental and none of which the actual description of the world can apply. In this conception there is a pluralism, as it implies a wide variety of equally fundamental perspectives. In this case, however, Putnam faces the challenge of having to show that the denial of a fundamental perspective does not lead to fundamental relativism.
Pluralism as a general attitude
Pluralism means in practice, recognizing and Apply leave a multiplicity, be they ideas, religions and cultures, ways of life and customs. The pluralism of worldviews means recognition of political or religious beliefs, which are heterogeneous in origin. This Gelten- let pluralism can take various forms. If the Other only tolerant accepted, perhaps seen as different, reinterpreted and assimilated, or really recognized as an other, as equally understood and actively protected. Monism as an antonym for Pluralism is the belief that all derive from a comprehensive principle of supernatural or natural way to explain in a whole and to evaluate is: religion and state, education and science, public and private life. There are manifestations of the one Spirit, the one God, the idea of a society. In this monism of truth claim and the exclusivity that can step up to the intolerance of other beliefs, dogmatism and fundamentalism and the extreme to be aggressive totalitarianism. In this system, since any dissenting views must act as a negation of the one and absolutely ruling principle, there is no real place for civil liberties and individualism.
Sandkühler (1996 ) explains: " Not only in the world of social interests and values, but also in the world of ideas and knowledge - including worldviews, theories and sciences - there is the one dispute between the cultures ' because perspectivity not a hintergehbares Apriori, a general and necessary condition for experience, knowledge and theory is. Thus, the problem of coexistence (and the incommensurability ) of cultures already for epistemology, and even here, especially the political, it is about freedom and order, the individual of the individual and the general law. " " In philosophy and other forms of worldview construction has pluralism Although widely accepted as a matter of course against system requirements and monisms or dualisms; but he is justified only in a few philosophies explicitly theoretical ( ontological, epistemological, methodological ). "..." pluralism is indeed faced with the skeptical question of whether he is not necessarily wrong in the horror of arbitrariness and relativism. Who in the affirmative the question, looks in the concept of pluralism, philosophical irrationalism to increase an everyday ontological, epistemological and methodological anything goes. "
Pluralism is of critical- rationalist view of a general scientific knowledge attitude. Basically, a plurality of theories that are mutually in a relationship of criticism is accepted and rejected the dogmatic truth claims of each theory. "And who is against pluralism, should know whereof he speaks, and consider whether it really wants to give up all that he believes he must reject as Antipluralist. "