Pluralism

“True pluralism...is always universal pluralism, (or integral-aperspectival): you start with the commonalities and deep structures that unite human beings--we all suffer, and triumph, laugh and cry, feel pleasure and pain, wonder and remorse; we all have the capacity to form images, symbols, concepts, rules; we all have 208 bones, two kidneys, and one heart…And then you add all the wonderful differences, surface structures, culturally constructed variants, and so on, that make various groups--and various individuals--all different, special, and unique. But if you start with the differences and the pluralism, and never make it to the universal, then you have only the aprespectival madness, ethnocentric revivals, regressive catastrophes.”

–Ken Wilbur from One Taste

In the philosophical realm, the idea of pluralism claims that ultimately there are countless sorts of essences, no consistently common set of truths.

In metaphysics, pluralism states that there is a multitude of fundamental materials that constitute the world. This metaphysical pluralist standpoint boasts that there is no singularity when it comes to conceptions and perceptions, no cohesive set of rules that define nature—only that there are an innumerable amount of basic divisions of ideas.

When taking a more epistemological stance, however, pluralism declares that there are a number of contradictory but still very accurate explanations of the cosmos. Since there is no sole correct method of breaking apart the universe into fully universal perceptions, there will be multiple equally select/limited, wholly precise descriptions of the world. Truth is analogous to culture, and therefore every culture will have varying worldviews on what is accurate. And since truth is also relative to success, and success is linked to the objectives on sets according to their interests, the right group of “truths” will be contingent to every individual’s diverse passions.

Although I disagree with Clark’s conspicuous tendency towards naturalism, I do agree with his belief that, when it comes to standards in a democratic society such as ours, it’s essential to maintain a commitment to empiricism. Through the implementation of the First Amendment, modern society has come to acknowledge a vast diversity of faiths, religions, and spiritualities. By upholding an empirical stance (at least publically), our culture evades inflexibilities in thought and logic, basing its practical (notice, not ethical) substance on fact alone. Empiricism is the intellectual foundation which sets the stage for democratic pluralism; with such a system, every individual, despite the obstacles presented by such extensively varying beliefs, can accept the idea of an “ultimate reality” and can thus successfully communicate (if not even relate) to others both sympathetically and peacefully in our “this-world” reality.