T e c h n o s c i e n c e

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.

www.group-telegram.com/ye/spectralvalkyriememepod.com/17741

100 viewsJan 30 at 06:17

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