Talk:evaluative diversity
Discrimination[edit]
I restored "(the thing discriminated in evaluativism)" to the definition to keep it from being deleted as Sum Of Parts (see the current discussion on moral diversity). Keeping that (or something like it) in the definition indicates that it is an idiom, like "age diversity", which refers to a basis for discrimination (rather than just referring to diversity which is evaluative). Some diversity which is evaluative is not a basis for discrimination, so the idiom is not a mere sum of parts. Silversalt (talk) 22:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Worldviews[edit]
In cleanup, "Disparity of inclinations not contingent on matters of fact" was replaced with "Disparity of worldviews..." I see how that is simpler, but worldviews seems to always take a global context, while inclinations does not. Suppose we observe a political debate between two people with dramatically different worldviews but who basically agree on the debated issues--would we say the debate suffered from a lack of evaluative diversity? If we accept this cleanup, I'm afraid one would have to say there was tremendous evaluative diversity (it just happens not to be relevant to the debate at hand)...
My other concern with the term "worldviews" is that worldviews may include far more than mere values. For example, Sally may be bringing Jim to his own surprise birthday party. Jim thinks he is just helping her move luggage into her house, but Sally thinks there will be a big party. Does this difference qualify as "evaluative diversity"? Silversalt (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)