Philosophical Research:Schizophrenic point of view
For the purposes of analyzing philosophies, signifiers may take the form of jargon terms, ordinary words employed in recognizable but highly-specific usages, repeated quotes from older texts, repeated in-text citations or prior work titles, or images with controversial meanings across different philosophies. For instance, "Stalin's government" could be considered a signifier because within the broad field of Marxist discourse Trotskyists and Stalin followers interpret the significance of the image differently and attach different underlying models of real-world function to it. If it happens that these models are so drastically different they hardly even resemble each other, the Signifier-item is best divided into two separate Signifiers, such as "Stalin's government (Trotskyism)" and "Stalin's government (Stalin Thought)". Using this method of combining relatively-ordinary or widespread usages and disambiguating tags, controversies can be exposed which are normally invisible within the bounds of particular philosophies. It can be argued that projects such as Wikipedia suffer from the inability to package themselves in localized, biased language familiar to real-world readers, who may look at the neutral framings of Wikipedia, regard them as foreign to their particular philosophy and experience, and reject the whole project as "biased" or "improperly infiltrated by mainstream thought". However, if a project instead decides to forego pretending that neutrality through a single point of view is possible and simply express itself in several different biased framings at once, it becomes easier to illuminate the differences between various different biased ideologies and the relationship of each ideology to material reality and what is most likely to be true.
This should, and, will be a new page shortly...
- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia
Perhaps you have heard of particular projects having "Neutral point of view"
It is easy to argue that in a world made of plural populations all practicing different internal philosophies neutrality is a material impossibility
How can the world prevent Conservapedias? Why, by following Schizophrenic point of view!
This article may sound funny but it's genuinely not meant as satire