I will prove that people want this worldview arsenal upgrade, with an example.
The Myers-Briggs personality tests provides a useful analogy for understanding pluralistic ontology.
In MBTI, there's no inherently "better" type -- an INTJ isn't superior to an ESFP. Rather, each type represents a different, yet equally valid way of perceiving and interacting with reality. Each type has its own internal logic and way of making decisions that makes sense within its framework.
Similarly, in a pluralistic ontology, different systems of thought/action (like conventional morality vs. pure action-consequence frameworks as put forth above) can coexist as valid ways of engaging with reality. Just as an INTJ might make decisions based on future implications, while an ESFP might focus on immediate experiential data, different (ontological) frameworks provide different yet valid bases for action.
In monistic ontology (like monotheistic religions or strict materialism), there is ONE fundamental reality or truth. Everything must ultimately be reconciled with or reduced to this single foundation. It's like trying to force every personality into a single "correct" MBTI type, saying "Everyone should be an INTJ" or "Everyone is really just an ESFP deep down."
Monistic thinking is dead and millions of roots grow off its carcass, all shooting for the light.
I will prove that people want this worldview arsenal upgrade, with an example.
The Myers-Briggs personality tests provides a useful analogy for understanding pluralistic ontology.
In MBTI, there's no inherently "better" type -- an INTJ isn't superior to an ESFP. Rather, each type represents a different, yet equally valid way of perceiving and interacting with reality. Each type has its own internal logic and way of making decisions that makes sense within its framework.
Similarly, in a pluralistic ontology, different systems of thought/action (like conventional morality vs. pure action-consequence frameworks as put forth above) can coexist as valid ways of engaging with reality. Just as an INTJ might make decisions based on future implications, while an ESFP might focus on immediate experiential data, different (ontological) frameworks provide different yet valid bases for action.
In monistic ontology (like monotheistic religions or strict materialism), there is ONE fundamental reality or truth. Everything must ultimately be reconciled with or reduced to this single foundation. It's like trying to force every personality into a single "correct" MBTI type, saying "Everyone should be an INTJ" or "Everyone is really just an ESFP deep down."
Monistic thinking is dead and millions of roots grow off its carcass, all shooting for the light.
BY T e c h n o s c i e n c e
Warning: Undefined variable $i in /var/www/group-telegram/post.php on line 260
For example, WhatsApp restricted the number of times a user could forward something, and developed automated systems that detect and flag objectionable content. Channels are not fully encrypted, end-to-end. All communications on a Telegram channel can be seen by anyone on the channel and are also visible to Telegram. Telegram may be asked by a government to hand over the communications from a channel. Telegram has a history of standing up to Russian government requests for data, but how comfortable you are relying on that history to predict future behavior is up to you. Because Telegram has this data, it may also be stolen by hackers or leaked by an internal employee. At its heart, Telegram is little more than a messaging app like WhatsApp or Signal. But it also offers open channels that enable a single user, or a group of users, to communicate with large numbers in a method similar to a Twitter account. This has proven to be both a blessing and a curse for Telegram and its users, since these channels can be used for both good and ill. Right now, as Wired reports, the app is a key way for Ukrainians to receive updates from the government during the invasion. For Oleksandra Tsekhanovska, head of the Hybrid Warfare Analytical Group at the Kyiv-based Ukraine Crisis Media Center, the effects are both near- and far-reaching. Asked about its stance on disinformation, Telegram spokesperson Remi Vaughn told AFP: "As noted by our CEO, the sheer volume of information being shared on channels makes it extremely difficult to verify, so it's important that users double-check what they read."
from cn
