Non-essentialism
From Geography
(Created page with "The belief that any given entity or or subject cannot be propositionally defined in terms of specified values or characteristics, which that must have to be defined as that entity.") |
|||
| (One intermediate revision not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | + | Non-essentialism is, as the term metnions, opposed to essentialism. It stands for the belief that any given entity isn't automatically what it is called. A question is made why something is called and what it determines it to be called this way. | |
| + | |||
| + | For example essentialism can put questions by the defining of a chair, why it is called this way and the characteristics needed to define it. | ||
| + | Non-essentialism argues that there are no characteristics or traits that define this. Every aspect of something and its naming ''can'' be argued. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This can be a bit confusing, since each 'thing' is questioned about its existence and its difference witch others. | ||
| + | A non-essentialist however would define this as when everything is particular, because of the lack of defining it properly, that which is accidental is just as important as what is essential. | ||
| + | The main focus of this non-essentialism is then also a change of viewing things. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Contributors== | ||
| + | |||
| + | *''Page created by Paul van den Hogen --[[PaulHogen|PaulHogen]] 15:41, 24 September 2012 | ||
| + | *''Page enhance by Paul van den hogen --[[PaulHogen|PaulHogen]]--[[User:PaulHogen|PaulHogen]] 19:17, 24 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
Latest revision as of 17:17, 24 October 2012
Non-essentialism is, as the term metnions, opposed to essentialism. It stands for the belief that any given entity isn't automatically what it is called. A question is made why something is called and what it determines it to be called this way.
For example essentialism can put questions by the defining of a chair, why it is called this way and the characteristics needed to define it. Non-essentialism argues that there are no characteristics or traits that define this. Every aspect of something and its naming can be argued.
This can be a bit confusing, since each 'thing' is questioned about its existence and its difference witch others. A non-essentialist however would define this as when everything is particular, because of the lack of defining it properly, that which is accidental is just as important as what is essential. The main focus of this non-essentialism is then also a change of viewing things.
