In the social sciences, pluralism is a framework of interaction in which groups show sufficient respect and tolerance of each other, that they fruitfully coexist and interact without conflict or assimilation.
Pluralism is arguably one of the most important features of modern societies and social groups, and may be a key driver of progress in science, society and economic development.
In an authoritarian or oligarchic society, power is concentrated and decisions are made by few members. By contrast, in a pluralistic society, power and decision-making (and the ownership of the results of exercising power) are more diffused. It is believed that this results in more widespread participation and a greater feeling of commitment from society members, and therefore better outcomes. Examples of groups and situations where pluralism is important are: a firm, a political body and an economy, the scientific community.
It can be argued that the pluralistic nature of the scientific process is a major factor in the rapid growth of knowledge. In turn, knowledge growth arguably leads to increased human welfare, due to, for example, greater productivity and economic growth and better medical technology.
Here pluralists point to the successes of non-business interest groups, such as labor unions from the 1930s to the 1960s, or environmentalists and consumer advocates in the 1970s, as evidence for their theory.
Pluralists deny or ignore this claim, which is morally offensive to Marxists because of their concern with equality and social justice.
Pluralist theory is first of all a statement that advanced capitalist countries are not monarchies or dictatorships, which is not really necessary.
First, pluralists note that if a majority of people do not like what their representatives are doing, they can vote them out of office at the next election.
What matters to pluralists about the distribution of power in society is not that it is uneven, but that it is widely dispersed rather than concentrated into the hands of the few.
Pluralists argue that such a system is healthy because it encourages political participation, it ensures that people can exert influence over decision makers, it ensures that power is dispersed rather than concentrated into the hands of a few and, at the same time, it allows the view of minority groups to be voiced.
Feeds |
Contact