3 ms·
I think you have some good points but whose to say an -ism isn't the correct philosophy? You assume that -isms are inherently wrong. Why?
by tkahn6 16y ago
I think you have some good points but whose to say an -ism isn't the correct philosophy?
You assume that -isms are inherently wrong. Why?
- chwahoo 16y agoThat's a fair question. I think most -isms simplify complex systemic issues by applying a particular framing. Since this abstracts away aspects of the issue that don't fit frame but might still be important, -isms may fail to address the critical problems (or even acknowledge problems that some people care about). This isn't a very specific argument, but it's hard to argue against -isms as a general idea.
- tkahn6 16y agoI can see what you are talking about. But I think your opinions on -isms preclude the idea that there truly is an objectively best way to view the world (which optimizes fairness without making exceptions for specific cases). I'm not convinced that one doesn't exist but I definitely agree with what you are saying.