Hi,

I've been struggling to define the three terms "dogmatism","skepticism" and "eclecticism" for a Thai friend with an slight essay crisis.

It's an essay about how disputes arise about the meaning of political terms such as "politics" "democracy" and "political freedom" (a tricky enough topic in English, let alone in Thai!).

I've suggested we start by looking at the different conceptual approaches which can be used to establish meaning, hence "dogmatism, skepticism and eclecticism".

So, as follows, the English word, a description (by political science scholar E.Garver) and an attempted Thai translation:

1. Dogmatism - “My answer is right and all others are wrong” - การคิดว่าความเห็นของตนเองถูกต้อง
2. <a name="T2E4577286">Skepticism - “All answers are equally true (or false); everyone has a right to his own truth” - ความกังขาคติเชิงความหมาย
3. Eclecticism - “Each meaning gives a partial view so the more meanings the better” การสรรหาความหมายจากแหล่งต่างๆ

I'd really appreciate if anyone can offer better translations / suggestions / constructive criticism - especially as I'm not an expert in political theory or Thai language by any means!

Sorry, i can not help with the translation into thai.

But....

Do you think it is a dogma to say that 1 and 1 add up to 2, and all other answers are wrong?

And skepticism.... that definition seems to fit better to nihilism.

I truly hope that your thai friend finds a way to explain / translate these expressions in thai.

The skeptic / dogmatic in me would suggest that your thai friend should wait several reincarnations before trying to explain 19th century farang words here in thailand.

Sorry, i can not help with the translation into thai.

But....

Do you think it is a dogma to say that 1 and 1 add up to 2, and all other answers are wrong?

And skepticism.... that definition seems to fit better to nihilism.

I truly hope that your thai friend finds a way to explain / translate these expressions in thai.

Thanks for the input, I think the three descriptions apply in trying to define "normative" concepts (such as "democracy", "politics" "power") rather than "descriptive" concepts like "1" "2" "table" or "white". I maybe should have provided a clearer context in the OP.

So while it's not dogmatic to say "1 + 1 = 2" or "all bachelors are unmarried" it is dogmatic to say that "the main criteria of democracy is the right of citizens to vote" when there are other criteria (like equal opportunities for citizens to attain political leadership).

Likewise I agree it's nihilistic to say that one man's "1" can be another man's "2" or "3", but with something like "democracy" it's skeptical to say that the different criteria (equal rights to vote, equal participation in political life, equal rights to political power) are equally valid.

The skeptic / dogmatic in me would suggest that your thai friend should wait several reincarnations before trying to explain 19th century farang words here in thailand.

Agreed! I'm not sure what her university tutor was thinking, giving her a very abstruse English article and expecting a presentation in Thai the following week. In any case I think we'll just work with the simplest and clearest definitions we can, and illustrate them with lots of examples.