To write from a neutralpoint of view, one presents controversial views without asserting them; to do that, it generally suffices to present competing views in a way that is more or less acceptable to their adherents, and also to attribute the views to their adherents.
We said that the neutralpoint of view is not, contrary to the seeming implication of the phrase, some actual point of view that is "neutral" or "intermediate" among the different positions.
Natural point of view, as in the idea of natural law, is often the result of choosing a particular science, e.g.
Buddhism and Taoism idealize the approach to such a point of view, but admit it is hard or impossible to achieve, and definitely impossible to reliably communicate to a human being.
Alfred Korcybski in his General Semantics theory pointed out that the verb "to be" hides a great many divergences in point of view, and that the terms becomes, remains and equals were far more exact and placed one more exactly in a temporal frame.
Feeds |
Contact