|
|
General Discussion
Started by NickOtani at 07-12-2006 2:27 AM. Topic has 2 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 07-12-2006, 2:27 AM
|
NickOtani
Joined on 04-21-2006
Posts 323
|
Panikkar's Four Attitudes
|
|
|
|
|
These attitudes are taken from Raimundo Panikkar's essay on "Four Attitudes," and they can apply to personal philosophies as well as religions.
Case I is Exclusivism: My philosophy is true; others are false.
Strength- Many religions actually make this claim. It can lead to a certain confidence and clear purpose. There is a sort of heroic passion shown by some people who have strong convictions.
Weakness- It is potentially intolerant, arrogant, contemptous of anyone who doesn't share this view.
Case 2 is Inclusivism: My philosophy is best. Others are inferior, but not necessarily false.
Strength- This is more tolerant without being eclectic or relativistic.
Weakness- It's rather hubristic, judgmental. It's condescending to other philosophies, as if they are merely being tolerated but not embraced.
Case 3- Parallelism: My philosophy is one path to truth, but others are equally viable.
Strength- This is tolerant and avoids eclecticiasm or "blending." It's a seperate but equal approach.
Weakness- It leaves philosophies in isolation. There is little guidance for interrelation.
Case 4- Interpenetration: My philosophy is one imperfect path amongst many, each of which has something to learn from the others.
Strength- It is tolerant, ecumenical, cooperative, open-ended.
Weakness- It doesn't stand for much. It could be too relativistic. It's "bimbo" like, nothing there. It could also be dismissive of all other religions and be a super religion, including all other religions.
Which one are you?
bis bald,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
07-30-2006, 6:28 PM
|
paine
Joined on 07-30-2006
Posts 9
|
Re: Panikkar's Four Attitudes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mine works for me. you're on your own.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
07-31-2006, 10:24 AM
|
Andy_X69
Joined on 12-15-2005
Posts 75
|
Re: Panikkar's Four Attitudes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The description of case 2: "Others are inferior, but not necessarily false," but is not the goodness of a philosophy to be judged on how true that philosophy is?
Since there are quite a few philosophies that will agree on a few points that I advance, Im probably a case 2, in that I consider my philosophy to make the most number of correct points, although many other philosophies/philosophers have made some good (true) points as well.
One thing that may complicate matters is how objectivity is contextural (so hence, two agents from different contexts can both advocate different things and in principle both be objectively correct), so there MAY at times be scope for case 3 to apply to me.
At times, my manner can make me come accross as a case 1, though. So I guess I average out to a 2, although I can go from 1 to 3.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
The Atlas... » Ayn Rand's Idea... » General Discuss... » Re: Panikkar's Four Attitudes
|
|
|
|