Difference between revisions of "Neutralism"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(several links) |
(feel free to revert me if this is wrong...) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Neutralism''' is remaining neutral when [[faith]] or [[morality]] require taking a position or stand. It is the ducking of moral or religious [[responsibility]]. | + | '''Neutralism''' is remaining neutral when [[faith]] or [[morality]] require taking a position or stand. It is the ducking of moral or religious [[responsibility]]. It can be argued that neutralism implicitly is taking a stand in itself. |
The philosopher [[Benedict de Spinoza]] advocated this approach in the 1600s as a result of his view that [[mind]], [[matter]], [[time]] and everything that seems to be real is merely a manifestation of only one [[substance]], One Reality. | The philosopher [[Benedict de Spinoza]] advocated this approach in the 1600s as a result of his view that [[mind]], [[matter]], [[time]] and everything that seems to be real is merely a manifestation of only one [[substance]], One Reality. | ||
[[category:philosophy]] | [[category:philosophy]] | ||
[[category:religion]] | [[category:religion]] | ||
Revision as of 04:49, January 6, 2008
Neutralism is remaining neutral when faith or morality require taking a position or stand. It is the ducking of moral or religious responsibility. It can be argued that neutralism implicitly is taking a stand in itself.
The philosopher Benedict de Spinoza advocated this approach in the 1600s as a result of his view that mind, matter, time and everything that seems to be real is merely a manifestation of only one substance, One Reality.