I thought the intention was to regard partisanship as biased.

"Thrif you make no sense"

Not again..

When you apply terminal logic to terms, they inevitably become atomic and meaningless.

Aquinas was a philosopher who was obsessed with education, and scholasticism endures.

Comments about the social order weren't regarded as relevant in the time Thomas lived.

Monism is the idea that all things are of the same substance. Difficulty arises when numbers are paired with physical events because the mind appears to be the only factor pairing them.

I mentioned elsewhere truth is a linguistic statement. All good philosophers define their terms, and the term you are possibly looking for is "reality".

Insofar as truth is concerned, outside of modal logic, it's a statement of preference. The reality that there are no truths and that society is contrived is essentially a statement of belief.

Where are you going? Monism?

Theory bites the dust as soon as morality is proved to be separate from justice.

Morality is a statement of normativity so I'm not sure why I should necessarily care for other people.

Right. Science's refinement is a subject. I point to the fact humanity has found it useful as the truest marker because competing theories have yet failed to achieve its results.

In the case that truth is constructed, we can remedy this by rigorous scientific analysis. I adhere to a faintly positivist attitude that science is true, and that humans are merely representations of data which can be expressed mathematically, even their beliefs. It's not perfect but it has a funny habit of predicting the future. To me that's quite real.

It would probably rely on the concept of logic. Predicate, term, and propositional.

Your objection is an objection of terms. This can be substituted effortlessly for any other quantifier.

Hold on.. truth is regarded as a linguistic qualifier. I feel like terms are being misused here.

What is metaphysically real is called so. Truth is a statement which is logically valid, in language.

"All fathers are male" is a statement of truth. "All fathers exist" is real based on accepted models.

That's illogical because science is continually reformed by philosophical models as necessary.

The positions have evolved quite recently in my mind, and they take four dimensions.

Right-wing politics involves tradition, market, nation, and normativism. Left involves innovation, society, globalization, and application. All four variables are given in extremes and can be plotted on a chart.

How about..

Scientism is an instrumentally doctrinal attitude of truth founded on both natural and modal principles.

I don't really dwell in articles, so please forgive me. But I can speak generally in that this is a historic topic, so you can arguably trace it back to the Greek idea where everything is one. Zeno is my favorite because he's handily archetypal. The next marker would be either Descartes or Kant, who juggled ideas about the mind, and were hugely influential. Their work is documented extensively, the latter accidentally defining a philosophical schism which still exists. The constructivist approach is an attitude which has developed since the 60's, also extensively documented. It's quite modular, almost atomic in principle. Being a champion of independence, I'll save you my personal response to that particular thought, but in essence it's coherentist..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivist_epistemology ?

Pragmatist. I solve the problem by the inclusion of a fourth parameter:

Knowledge is justified, unfalisfied, true belief.

Gettier doesn't impress me. The fact we missed this detail is likely coincidental or even imaginary.