Plurality vs. Pluralism

By Joel on March 25, 2006

This evening a dinner conversation about diversity emerged. Is it good or bad? Does it spice up life, or breed dissonance and deviance? After a couple hours of thought-provoking arguments, I still believe my initial instincts, but have also learned something. Diversity (in the guise of pluralism) is not a value. But plurality is a good.

I suggest a great book on the matter--Building on Solid Ground: Authentic Values & How to Attain Them1. In it, Thomas Williams, LC helps pinpoint the difference between plurality and pluralism. As he puts it, plurality is "the objective recognition that diversity exists", while pluralism "maintains that a perfect or ideal society is necessarily made up the widest range of values possible."

Well, I support the first definition. And I admit that I was a little void of this, especially in our conversation. Acknowledging that diversity (in understanding, thought processing, etc) exists, I have to accept that some people have different thoughts (than me), and I need to consider this when conversing with them. But this is where it gets tough. Truth really exists, and therefore diversity is only good insofar as it contributes to uniformity.

Anyway, it bogs my mind, and I could write a thesis on it. But you'd be better to simply read the book! Any thoughts?

Links

  1. http://www.albahouse.org/Building.htm
» Joel's blog | 3 comments

Comments

1. michael on Mar 25, 06 at 3:38 am

I, too, recently had a conversation about the same topic... strange...

Two thoughts come to mind after reading your blog-

  1. Things that are good are often times corrupted - especially through human nature. Our (human) reaction to a good thing could result in something bad/evil. So, we can screw up something that is good.

  2. Is diversity connected with pluralism as often as you suggest? If we take into account the Church as Catholic, or Universal, aren't we then implying that there is some diversity necessary in the Church? Of course, that is probably not using diversity as a guise for pluralism.

Anyway, this is interesting food for thought. Thanks!

pax...

2. Joel on Mar 25, 06 at 9:11 am

Mike: thanks for your thoughts. In response to your question in #2: diversity, when it leads to and builds up uniformity--some common goal or value--is great. You and I are diverse people in our personalities, or tastes in music, even our hair color. Yet together, our uniformity shines as the (one) body of Christ. But pluralism encourages "the widest range of values possible". This is problematic, because in our example, though there are some that contribute to the body of Christ, there exist values that don't build up that Body, and therefore have no place among us.

In all this I am not saying we should be void of an awareness of diversity. Christ certainly ministered to everyone differently, uniquely. He understood plurality--that each person had differences in background, education, and the pains of sin--and so worked within that to build up uniformity.

The Church should (and does) recognize this. Have you ever wondered why our Holy Father works closely with Protestant and Jewish leaders? Is he suggesting that the "widest range of values" is something to be obtained? Or does he recognize that diversity exists, and seeks to build uniformity?

3. Brian on Mar 28, 06 at 10:31 am

I think you have to say that some degree of pluralism is good. Perhaps it is correct to say that "Some variety of values desirable". However, just like many other "ism"'s, when it gets out of hand and becomes someone's sole ideology, it is no longer good. It becomes a distortion of the diversity that God intended for us.

I don't know enough about the subject to agree or disagree that this is the true definition of pluralism. When looking at Dictionary.com, I found the following:

plu·ral·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (plr-lzm) n. 1)The condition of being multiple or plural.

2A) A condition in which numerous distinct ethnic, religious, or cultural groups are present and tolerated within a society.

2B) The belief that such a condition is desirable or socially beneficial.

3) Ecclesiastical. The holding by one person of two or more positions or offices, especially two or more ecclesiastical benefices, at the same time.

4) Philosophy. The doctrine that reality is composed of many ultimate substances. The belief that no single explanatory system or view of reality can account for all the phenomena of life.

Looking at the second set of definitions (2A and 2B), I would say that it is a desirable state. It would be great if we were all one religion, but our ethnic and cultural diversity could be authentically expressed within Catholicism and indeed enhance the Body of Christ.

This, definition, of course, says nothing about values.

Add Your Comment