anarchism anthropomorphism atheism
atomism Bayesianism behaviourism
Buddhism capitalism Cartesianism
Christianism cohenterism communism
communitarism compatibilism computationalism
conceptualism Confucianism connectionism
consequentialism constitutivism constructivism
contextualism conventionalism critical rationalism
cynism Daoism Darwinisme
decisionism deconstructivism deism
determinism disjunctivism dualism
egalitarianism eliminativism empiricism
enactivism Epicurism epiphenomalism
essentialism existentialism expressivism
externalism fallibilism falsificationism
fascism feminism Fichteanisme
fictionalism fideism finitism
formalism foundationalism foundherentism
functionalism Hegelianism Hinduism
historicism holism humanism
hylomorfism idealism illusionism
incompatibilism indeterminism inductivism
infallibilism infinitism innatism
internalism interpretivism Jainism
Kantianism Leninism liberalism
libertarianism Marxism materialism
mentalism mercantilism modernism
monism nationalism naturalism
Nazism Neo-Marxism Neo-Platonism
nihilism nominalism normativism
objectivism Orthodoxism panpsychism
particularism personalism perspectivism
physicalism Platonism populism
positivism postmodernism pragmatism
probabilism proceduralism Protestantism
Pyrrhonism quietism rationalism
realism reductionism reformism
relativism reliabilism representationalism
republicanism Roman-Catholicism scientism
secularianism situationism socialism
skepticism solipsism Spinozism
Stalinism Stoicism structuralism
subjectivism Sufism Taoism
theism Thomism totalitarianism
transactionalism utopism veritism
verificationism vitalism voluntarism
wokeism
Etc.
The above list is an
arbitrary list of -isms that I have found on the internet and in my own computer files. It is certainly not all there is! Moreover, many of the specific -isms in
the list have a different meaning according to the theme you are interested in.
For example there is realism in political science and in philosophy. The -isms
in this list are mainly philosophical but not only. Besides this, many -isms
can be subdivided. Take dualism. There is an ontological dualism and a
methodological dualism. Ontological dualism can be divided into three types of
dualism: substance dualism, property dualism and predicate dualisms. Seen that
way, my list is not more than an introduction to the ism-theory. In addition,
many -isms have a neo-, post-, and/or anti- version (some are in the list). So,
besides positivism, there is a neo-positivism, an anti-positivism and a
post-positivism. Or, to mention another limitation of my list: It refers mainly
to Western philosophy. The list is also arbitrary and one-sided since it
contains only -isms and no -ologies, -anities, etc. (it’s up to you to make such
lists).
However, with so many -isms inside and outside
philosophy, the main question in this blog is: Which -ism is true or which -isms
are true? But is this important? There simply is a view for everybody. Suum
cuique (To each their own)
3 comments:
The validity of a truth depends, then, on the context. This relates to my notion of contextual reality, or, put roughly: * truth/reality is whatever you, I or whomever says it is*. Pretty subjective stuff, because that sort of 'truth' is clearly true only in accordance with the interests, motives and preferences (IMPs) of a biased minority.
This is not solely the territory of philosophy---philosophers love to argue, debate and disect ismic topics. They are not the only ones. Where such matters as dogma, doctrine and ideology are involved,there are plenty of biases---IMPs--- and ample room for argument, and so on. Everyone makes a pitch for ideas and notions. And, holders of ideas and notions may change their minds.
Thank you for your comment, Paul. I agree, but the problem is we place other people in boxes, we place ourselves in boxes and other people place us in boxes. And then (see my quote last week) we tend to think that our box is the whole truth and other boxes are false. And others think so about us. But most of us are a little bit of this or that and so the truth is as well. Is Descartes a rationalist? Yes, but he has also empiricist traits (no wonder, for he was not only a philosopher but also a researcher). And so it is with many -ism: They often give an interesting and useful view on the world, and are useful for explaining and understanding the world. What I wanted to do in this blog is to relativize the box-view. Heated debates between opposite views (“isms”) are useful but many years later often it is so that these -isms were a step forward to something in between of maybe entirely different.
Yes, all of that is right Which is why I hold to the contextual reality notion. Taylor, at Stanford, was working on *representation*, before he died. I think there is interconnectivity here. It is multicultural, multilingual and multipolitical.
And, complicated.
Post a Comment