Thus, we seldom throw out disclaimers like "Here's a structural foundation of reality that we believe in, but it's based on underlying assumptions that we can't really justify other than by our collective consent. If you don't agree ........ here's how we can accommodate that disagreement".
So, can it be said that from certain POV, virtually every society we have is a form of "pluralistic totalitarianism", because it requires subservience and conformity to a set of mainstream ideals in order to participate in such society? — Devolved
Next - I recommend you take a look at "An Essay on Metaphysics" by R.G. Collingwood. ....
Next - take a look at StreetlightX's recent thread "The Poverty of Truth." ..... — T Clark
I guess my first comment is on your use of "totalitarian" in relation to the underlying assumptions. They're not totalitarian, they're just established and yes, also more or less enforced. How could that be any other way. And yes, you're right, they are rarely examined and that leads to problems. — T Clark
Thank you for these. Will check these out. — Devolved
By "totalitarian" I mean a cultural preset that intentionally narrows individual perception of choices in order to harness preferred actions of individuals, which essentially is a goal of any totalitarian regime - robotic obedience to axiomatic "societal program". — Devolved
The things you are talking about make up a complexly interacting system of beliefs, attitudes, and practices. — T Clark
I don't think intentionality applies to what we're talking about. Society doesn't intend things.... I don't see that as a particularly ominous thing. — T Clark
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.