Editing Philosophical Research:Schizophrenic point of view (section)

== SPOV versus NKPOV ==

There are two major strategies to deal with a world where encyclopedia readers outright dispute the truth. One of them will be called "schizophrenic point of view" (SPOV), and one of them will be called "North-Korean point of view" (NKPOV).

In some cases where a topic is contentious, letting a particular misconception people have about the world go on at all is simply too dangerous for the existence of any assembled population of people which is both peaceful and coherent, to the point that even an encyclopedia is obligated to take a partisan side. This observation is not up for debate — from any political angle. Taking an article on gender identity as a lower-stakes, only-somewhat-charged example, [[E:Toryism|Tory]]-leaning people can be quick to claim that presenting neutral observations about the subject supported by proper scientific methods and inquiry is "biased" and the article would not be complete without covering conspiracy theories about what various people subjectively believe is "really the truth", but at the same time, [[:Category:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition ontology|Existentialist]]- or [[E:anarchism|anarchist]]-leaning people can be quick to claim that the act of telling people to tolerate foreign cultures outside their own immediate countable culture is wholly non-political and that when people have Lived Experiences there is an inherently intuitive morality understood by all human beings which automatically compels everyone to tolerate these new human experiences. Neither of these claims is correct. The Tory is wrong because they have replaced all facts and realistic models with personal agendas. The Existentialist is wrong because they have failed to understand the role of material relationships between individuals in generating governments and politics, and thus have given an incomplete account of reality by failing to acknowledge an important aspect of living in the real world. When every common faction or "side" is wrong about the nature of what is true and how to know what is true in the first place, nobody will be able to accurately judge what is "biased" versus what can be said on a simple basis of facts and observations without controversy, which is to say that it is impossible to write with neutrality. For any piece of writing to be neutral, somebody must be able to verify independently that it is neutral based on an objective set of criteria. To achieve anything like the usual conception of fact-based objectivity with an issue where most reviewers will give a wrong account of what is biased and what is objective, there simply must be an independent set of criteria that everybody agrees to share and agrees to follow regardless of whether it is biased. Within this project, the set of criteria in question will be analyzing situations through meta-Marxist dialectical materialism, and if in doubt over whether something will be misunderstood, presenting situations to readers in language and conceptual vocabulary which would be understandable to somebody from either a hardly-developed Third World country or (if the page is in English, which most Ontology pages are) a crumbling region of the United States. "North-Korean point of view" (NKPOV) is the use of Marxist models and popularly-understood or reactionary vocabulary. The "North Korea" or "NK" is not literal and simply metaphorically represents any area of people at a Third-World level of development who despite limited knowledge and education are being assumed to be able to understand the basics of Marxism. You need not tie any of your analyses to concepts or models in [[E:Juche-socialism|Juche-socialism]]; the analogy is mainly in reference to the region and material conditions of North Korea.

In some fraction of articles, the risk of leaving people genuinely misinformed by entertaining the perspectives of multiple ideologies will not be as great, and it will be perfectly fine to present models of the same thing from multiple different ideologies in parallel, going into detail about each one. This is "schizophrenic point of view" (SPOV).