WHY I AM A PLURALIST
E. Glen Weyl, February 10, 2022
(DeepL)(excerpt)
I see two aspects to pluralism, institutional and epistemological.
... It is important to turn to the other side of pluralism, namely epistemology....
The reality of plural thinking is perhaps even more obvious than that of plural institutions. Again, let us consider some examples
Languages The 91 languages, classified into more than 10 language families, are spoken by more than 10 million people, with many more languages spoken by a smaller number of people each. According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, some thoughts are impossible in some languages and, even by softer theories, clearly some languages are better suited than others to express certain thoughts, so these language differences are in a sense important and reflect the conditions of the society that accepts them ... I think this is a very important point. Since "epistemological pluralism" doesn't quite get the message across.言語的Pluralityと呼ぼうnishio.icon Maybe "Plurality of words" would be better.
Thus, in parallel with institutional pluralism, a natural epistemological project is presented. Instead of aiming to integrate all disciplines into a single theory, or at least to move toward such a universal truth, what about speciation and differentiation of knowledge and active investment in bridging between disciplines in order to develop specific applications and technologies? In other words, rather than seeing knowledge as a search for a single, ultimate, universal truth, why not, in the spirit of ecology, see it as the gradual evolution of a stable coexisting diversity that specifies and becomes more complex as it develops?
gpt-4.icon
Institutional Pluralism
Institutional pluralism is contrasted with the broader social philosophy of "monism." Unitarian philosophies tend to focus on isolated individuals and the single/universal structure within which these individuals exist.
In institutional pluralism, groups are considered a fundamental concern, not merely a means to individual benefit.
From this perspective, the central ideology is often justified on the basis of a single or universal structure. This is often used to justify capitalism.
However, institutional pluralism rejects the idea that any one group/group is not central. For example, nations, all of humanity, etc. are not central entities.
This view is contrasted with the centrist ideology often used to justify populist nationalism and nationalism.
Institutional pluralism is understood as a social philosophy that recognizes and promotes the flourishing and cooperation of diverse socio-cultural groups/systems.
Epistemological Pluralism
Epistemological pluralism is contrasted with traditions that seek a single, common way of knowing.
This perspective rejects the idea that a single rational logic or institution of meritocracy can select the optimal social order.
Instead, it emphasizes the importance of a diverse range of incompatible collective entities that intersect and cooperate with each other and the culture of knowledge.
This idea is contrasted with technocracy. Technicism is one of the traditions that seeks a single, common way of knowing.
Epistemological pluralism imagines knowledge not as the pursuit of one ultimate, universal truth, but according to the spirit of ecology: the sequential evolution of a stable coexisting diversity as it develops, the differentiation and complexity of species as it develops.
---
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/WHY I AM A PLURALIST using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.