Talk:Reverse post-material thesis
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Reverse post-material thesis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
very awkward little article[edit]
An interesting topic, but the handling is stunted. Foremost, it needs more input: the only sources presented are a general overview, followed by M&W apparently arguing both sides simultaneously. (As their book was published 2004, its timeliness is now questionable, considering immigration backlash and Brexit and Trump.)
Root terms do desperately need to be defined in order to make this a stand-alone article rather than a disconnected footnote. I've pointed up most of the more-significant gaps in argumentation.
However, maybe begin with the title itself: someone ought have put up a brief explication of materialism (or materialist). Given that, it's much simpler to comprehend the significance of the term post-materialist, particularly with the proffered examples. Only at that point would a previously unenlightened WP reader have any hope of properly grasping the significance of the article topic.
Also, there should be some comments as to why "reverse post-materialist" is somehow different from simply returning to being "materialist." Does the thesis claim that the two are somehow different? Is RPM a progressive swing of the pendulum back from an overreach for Utopia, or a reactionary/regressive (Rightist) return to "good old days" fantasies?
Weeb Dingle (talk) 14:37, 18 March 2018 (UTC)