I for my part refuse to be persuaded that we cannot look beyond the obvious pluralism of the naturalist and the pragmatist to a logical unity in which they take no interest.
Pluralism on the other hand has no need of this dogmatic rigoristic temper.
So the rival metaphysical hypotheses ofpluralism and monism here come back upon us.
A belief in transmigration is with Ward organically connected with hispluralism and pampsychism.
The ancientpluralism took the form of atomism, but the concourse of atoms may account for rigidity and uniformity but not for spontaneity.
Pluralism has been called a means of escape alike from "Naturalism's desert and the barren summit of the Absolute.
Pluralism begins with the many and ends with the many.
It says there is a certain ultimate pluralism in it; and, so saying, it corroborates our ordinary unsophisticated view of things.
But while I freely admit that the pluralism and the restlessness are repugnant and irrational in a certain way, I find that every alternative to them is irrational in a deeper way.
Make as great an uproar about chance as you please, I know that chance means pluralism and nothing more.
For the only consistent way of representing a pluralism and a world whose parts may affect one another through their conduct being either good or bad is the indeterministic way.
If some of the members of the pluralism are bad, the philosophy of pluralism, whatever broad views it may deny me, permits me, at least, to turn to the other members with a clean breast of affection and an unsophisticated moral sense.
The rectories for the most part were miserably poor, so that pluralism might be necessary to make an income.
But pluralism of the most scandalous kind also prevailed, and we have a dean holding two groups of livings, fourteen livings in all, one group twelve miles away from the other.
All thought starts from the ordinary dualism or pluralism which conceives of the world as consisting of the juxtaposition of mutually independent things and persons.
Linguistic pluralism and diversity are not obstacles to the free circulation of men, ideas, goods and services, as would like to suggest some objective allies, consciously or not, of the dominant language and culture.
But Lotze discards the rigid monads of his master for the more intelligible soul-substances of Leibniz--or rather of Bruno--whose example he also follows in his attempt to combine pluralism with monism.
Of course the "subliminal" theory is an inessential hypothesis, and the question of pluralism or monism is equally inessential.
And altho' I "put pluralism in the place of philosophy," I do it only so far as philosophy means the articulate and the scientific.
This forms one permanent inferiority of pluralism from the pragmatic point of view.
The pragmatism or pluralism which I defend has to fall back on a certain ultimate hardihood, a certain willingness to live without assurances or guarantees.
Pluralism actually demands them, since it makes the world's salvation depend upon the energizing of its several parts, among which we are.
The German systems of monistic thought invoked the pluralism of Herbart; while the pantheism of Spinoza called forth the monadism of Leibniz.
Pluralism and idealism are or may be both definitely spiritual philosophies, and perhaps they appeal to different types of mind.
Another important work, written from a similar point of view, is Professor James Ward's Pluralism and Theism (1911).
Equally dialectical is the effort to establish by a consideration of the nature of relations an ontological Pluralism of Ultimates: simple and independent beings.
They have looked forward rather than backward, have tacitly acknowledged the reality of change, the irreducible pluralism of nature, and the genuineness of the activities, oppugnant or harmonizing, between the items of the Cosmic.
This view of emotional pluralism is one which I should myself be compelled to hold.
Prince wants is an emotional pluralism such as might well be founded upon the data in MacDougall's "Social Psychology" and in Shand's work on "The Foundations of Character.
When not faithful to its own experience of pluralism and self-motivation, the USA faces the inherent limitations of literacy-based practical experience in a number of domains, the political included.
It is curious how little countenance radical pluralism has ever had from philosophers.
It is just because so many of the conjunctions of experience seem so external that a philosophy of pure experience must tend to pluralism in its ontology.
Whatever I may say, each of you will be sure to take pluralism or leave it, just as your own sense of rationality moves and inclines.
The pluralism with which our view began has to give place to a monism; and the 'transeunt' interaction, being unintelligible as such, is to be understood as an immanent operation.
But one as we are in this material sense with the absolute substance, that being only the whole of us, and we only the parts of it, yet in a formal sense something like a pluralism breaks out.
Pluralism lets things really exist in the each-form or distributively.
And this great difference between absolutism and pluralism demands no difference in the universe's material content--it follows from a difference in the form alone.
Mr. Bradley is the pattern champion of this philosophy in extremis, as one might call it, for he shows an intolerance to pluralism so extreme that I fancy few of his readers have been able fully to share it.
Pragmatically interpreted, pluralism or the doctrine that it is many means only that the sundry parts of reality may be externally related.
Here, then, you have the plain alternative, and the full mystery of the difference between pluralism and monism, as clearly as I can set it forth on this occasion.
In later times, when pluralism was general, and this living was held in conjunction with three or four other parishes, the rector must have been very dependent upon the clerk for information concerning the functions to be recorded.
It was this pluralism that led to much abuse, much neglect, and much carelessness.
So, as accord is the aim and the essence of our reason, we are caught in the snare of monism, pluralismhaving apparently become the equivalent of chaos, and thus the bete noir of rational metaphysics.
The world is in so far forth a pluralism of which the unity is not fully experienced as yet.
The above list will hopefully give you a few useful examples demonstrating the appropriate usage of "pluralism" in a variety of sentences. We hope that you will now be able to make sentences using this word.
