So we have here certain very confusing tags, like or even worse .

Tags become confusing if they lack a description (usage guidance). So what should the well-meaning person do who wants to give those tags a description?

In the case of rationalism, it seems that the more educated users understand rationalism à la Descartes and not à la Yudkowsky or something like an standpoint that values reason and is opposed to superstition, etc. Does this justify a corresponding tag description?

In the case of : users apply this to the political philosophy and to the free-will position. What should it be? That's nearly 50:50!

| |
  • 3
    Some of these terms are legitimately "slippery".. – Joseph Weissman Aug 18 '16 at 15:03
  • 2
    Oh geez, as someone who's studied the free-will debate pretty seriously but has not done any political philosophy, this has the potential to get extremely confusing. Would it be feasible to split the more 50:50 tags into, like, "libertarian-free-will" and "libertarian-politics"? – commando Aug 18 '16 at 15:35

I propose that we have for libertarianism in political philosophy and for the other one, since the former is clearly more common (in philosophy, not on this site). Same for , and for any other tags which might be like this.

And their descriptions should be updated to avoid confusion.

| |
  • this seems sensible. So... are we all okay with this? – wolf-revo-cats Aug 27 '16 at 19:49
  • The only caveat I see is that the 'libertarianism' tag is still ambiguous and may be abused by users who don't know better; it could be better to rename it to e.g. 'political-libertarianism'. On the other hand, it is not a frequently used tag, so this may be just fine. – user2953 Aug 28 '16 at 18:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .