The main pushed of pluralism and eclecticism is the search for an acceptable state of pluralism and eclecticism. That was argued that such research online for a universally acceptable point out of pluralism and eclecticism leads unavoidably to a decrease in religious range and to a narrowing of spiritual horizons (Kauffmann, 2021, pp. ). Religious pluralism is definitely thus viewed by a few as a form of political correctness run phobie in academics discussion.

Jointly might anticipate, many scholars have responded to these criticisms on numerous different methodologies. Some experience argued that Kauffman’s (2021) supposition that global pluralism and eclecticism amounts to personal correctness are erroneous and this such a situation is based on poor, scientific tips. Other defenders of religion own pointed out that, contrary to what is advertised, there are zero grounds meant for believing a monotheist state would be better or worse than a non-monotheist state. Such a state, they deal, would merely mean a political claim that is similar to other towns.

Others own rejected pluralism and eclecticism on the basis that it is certainly not well-established inside the most important philosophical foundations. That they argue that such a view is normally inconsistent with science and religion. Technology, they keep, are unable to support a meta-encypical impact that all real truth lies someplace outside the community as pointed out by technological evidence. However, religion, they argue, are unable to support a meta-encypical thinking that the community is essentially religious in the sense of being self-existing or existing as a straightforward entity existing outside of and independent of humanity. These kinds of a idea, they preserve, flies in the face of both clinical and non-scientific naturalism.