Pluralism-Condition Or Philosophy?
By Jonathan Pait (03/11/03)
What is pluralism in society? Well, much depends on the context in which the word is being used. When describing a condition, the concept denotes a society with various distinct groups living together in tolerance to one another. When used as a philosophy, pluralism is a belief that no one system can claim to explain life's answers for individuals within a society.
Our culture today is blurring the line between the condition and the philosophical doctrine. Today’s call to pluralism is more of a corporate relativism. It goes a step beyond simply tolerating various distinct groups within a society. It seeks to place all traditions, customs and beliefs within these distinct groups on an equal footing.
Well, what is wrong with that? Nothing, if such an approach is personal and not corporate. The problem comes when a society seeks to impose this doctrine on each distinct group. The philosophy of pluralism when imposed corporately actually destroys the condition of pluralism. It suppresses ideas and cultural diversity rather than allowing them to flourish. It treads on the dangerous ground of telling people what they should think (or what not to think) and what is acceptable belief.
This is most clearly seen in (though not limited to) religion. I recall a certain conflict that arose in my city of Greenville. A certain Rabbi was constantly berating members of the Greenville community because they would not join him in his Greenville Faith Communities United. The purpose of the organization and ones like it is to pull together the "faith communities" in order to address issues within the community at large.
Each religion is to be given equal credence. Never mind that the doctrines of these religions run counter to one another. The Christian is to accept the way of Islam as equal to Bible doctrine. "We all worship the same God. We simply worship him in different ways." "It doesn't matter what faith you have as long as you have faith." In the mind of the Rabbi, and others who hold this position, a great evil in the world is people who would say, "I believe that this religion holds the only answer to life and eternity." It is automatically assumed that these people are enemies of the condition of pluralism.
America has avoided many of the conflicts that engulf other cultures because we have created a condition of pluralism. Distinct groups are free to form common opinions and express ideas in conflict with other groups. When the conflicts go outside the realm of ideas into physical violence, our laws deal equally between the entities. This freedom and protection is the common bond that unites us. It is what has drawn men of distinct-and even conflicting-cultures and beliefs to die beside one another on the field of battle.
America’s history is not one of philosophical pluralism. Christianity was the primary religion of the vast majority of those early citizens. They did not seek a government-established religion but neither did they seek a government that ignored religion. Christian phraseology and ideas permeated those early foundational years. At the same time, our founders wished to tolerate religions that were not Christian.
The right to worship according to conscience was established. However, citizens were not forced to accept differing religions equally. Government leaders were not forced to check their religious beliefs at the door. Even though Christianity has for years been the majority religion, religious freedom has flourished in the America like no other country in history.
We should all fear the growing acceptance of corporate relativism-this philosophical pluralism. We should celebrate rather than bemoan the fact that others can believe differently than we do and debate against our own ideas. It is this freedom that is at the heart of our system of government. Obviously, true tolerance is indispensable to a properly functioning society.
Where there is a free exchange of ideas, there will always be a majority view. Now we are told that the majority view should be that there is no majority view. We are taught that the existence of a majority view is not true tolerance. The only acceptable philosophy or religion is one that says there are no absolutes.
What we are creating is a diversity of nothing. If philosophical pluralism wins, then the condition of pluralism ceases to exist. All we will have left is a façade of freedom.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Jonathan Pait
