Transcendence and immanence into or onto creative pluralism in South Africa

Two philosophical tools are used in this article, namely (1) that of philosophical-pluralism and (2) transcendent pluralism as a kind of glue to enhance our examining of creative pluralism. There is a diversity implant in positive modus of understanding this pluralistic pristine of creative pluralism within transcendence modus. To help facilitate this pluralistic pristine, the author makes use of three constructivist paradigms that are distinguished and used, namely (1) exogenous constructivism (rooted in a mechanistic metaphor) emphasising the reconstruction of structures preformed in the environment; (2) endogenous constructivism (rooted in an organismic metaphor) emphasising the coordination of previous organismic structures and (3) dialectical constructivism (rooted in a contextualistic metaphor) emphasising the construction of new structures out of organism and environmental interaction.Contribution: The aim of this article is to present a coherent metatheory by specifying the boundary conditions in which each root metaphor (constructive pluralism) best applies. These above-mentioned versions of pluralism as tools are a reminiscence and a jubilee of the efforts made by sapiens through diversity onto or into pluralism to enable the religious hamlet to think and share. This pluralistic approach of orientation, I hope, will empower sapiens in their respective hamlets to define, articulate and designate to enhance their own epistemological and ontological vantage points wherefrom their individual, coherent and contextual ways of thinking, acting and projecting their lives in a positive modus by emphasising the reconstructions of their performance in their environment.

Image, or what? an attempt towards a holistic exploration

The following is a proposition paper whose purpose is to try to provide a solid theoretical (modelling) background for research on image generation and image maintenance. As such, it is intentionally devoid of any experimental/empirical findings. And although we agree that model-reasoning is difficult to observe, we nevertheless utterly agree with Rosenblueth and Wiener’s stance according to which ‘scientific knowledge consists of a sequence of abstract models, preferably formal, occasionally material in nature (Rosenblueth/Wiener, 1945,320), who further also stated that ‘the ideal model would be one which would cover the entire universe’ (Rosenblueth/Wiener, 1945,320). We are, of course, convinced that material substance can and should be provided later on as research continues to accrue with reference to the model(s) proposed.General assumptions which are put forth in the paper are the following:1. image is pervasive in nature; in fact, in humans it is more pervasive than language. This is due to the fact that the visual-tactile modality is of fundamental significance in the daily conduct of the human species (see e.g. Fletcher, 1952; Pirenne, 1967; Schiffman, 1982; Gordon, 1989; Sekuler/Blake, 1994).2. Owing to its pervasiveness, image may be approached holistically, that is, it may be likened to life, especially to its exteriorization within the bounds of the material and perceiving/acting human body.3. The paper is based on some general theoretical orientations which may be summarized as the following:– material positivism: within this orientation, the subject matter of research is the universal occurrence of embodiment/entitiation and its consequences, dialectical constructivism: within this orientation, a human agent as an embodied entity/organism is assumed to be involved in a continuous process of constructing and changing images.