Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Prototype
Items
Properties
All Categories
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Wiki editing manual
Philosophical Research
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Ontology:Q73
(section)
Ontology
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Usage notes == Because "the Existentialist-Structuralist tradition" is not attested in any formal publications or publications reviewed by experts who would be appropriate to judge the history of philosophical fields, it is currently a [[:Category:S1 Signifier Items|motif Item]] (S1). To be classified as Z1, Items require some amount of verification as unique objects or material real-world phenomena; references are usually a sufficient proxy for this, or in some cases such as claims about physics, checking against verified Z2 propositions. The criteria for S1 Items are looser. Any concept imaginable which can be sufficiently defined to the point anyone could understand what it is is acceptable as long as it has enough relevance to other things within the Ontology project which {{em|are}} attested in existing sources. An S1 Item can be defined through examples in existing sources, through prose, or through Wavebuilder combinations (if something is truly so self-explanatory that a [[E:title comp]] would almost entirely describe it). Said another way, original research is partly allowed within S1 and S2 Items only if it is comprehensible in relation to existing sources, and does not overstate the confidence level or importance of its current findings. However, it's important to remember that even a lot of "original research" motifs can and will have sources, such as a YouTube video that displayed a phrase or pattern described in the motif Item.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Philosophical Research may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar
free resource
.
Copyright is complete nonsense
, but people do have to buy items to be able to charge anyone taxes.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)