Talk:Exceptionalism

This article is a mess

I actually had to stop and check to see that I was on Wikipedia and not some satirical site. Looking over the article history, this has been going downhill over time. This is an encyclopedia, not a place to explore theories or sling mud. If you want an article on exceptionalism then write about exceptionalism, not about situations you think may involve exceptionalism.

Furthermore, exceptionalism is correctly categorized as a sociological phenomenon, not a philosophical one.

I strongly suggest that this article be fully rewritten in order to bring its quality in-line with something that belongs in an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.176.62 (talk) 23:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Confounding Opener

The opening is worded in a very confusing way.

Japanese exceptionalism?

I think some information about Japanese exceptionalism would pad this article out a bit. Kitty 11:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Iran??

How? Iran's government is an anti-nationalist, Islamist regime that doesn't even acknowledge thousands of years of pre-Islamic Iranian history. It has been trying to abolish the Persian language for over two decades and replace it with Arabic. If anything, the Iranian regime seems as though it wants to fit in nicely with other Islamist (maybe not Salafist) movements within the Middle East.. Where did Venezuela come from? Because it's the Iranian regimes only friend? -68.43.58.42 02:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Economic bubbles

I've noticed Exceptionalism is claimed a lot during economic bubbles to explain why it won't crash. Remember the dot.com boom and how they all said that the old economic rules don't apply? The same happened with the housing bubble.

71.212.17.238 (talk) 17:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

All nationalists (especially far-right nationalists) are exceptionalists

Please add this in the article according to the "use common sense" dogma of wikipedia. --AaThinker (talk) 19:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

National exceptionalism, Religious exceptionalism and exceptionalism in law

Would seem like intuitive structuring? Richiez (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

In 1961, a philosophy of prevention

Here's some some info I found. I'm not sure how it could be worked in (I really don't have the time to spend a lot of time on improving this article although I was supprised at its definition of the topic): Exceptionalism says that in certain instances exceptional circumstances will result in distortion of a generally predictable course.<ref>Gove, Philip et al. 1961. '' Exceptionalism.'' Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, p. 792. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Company.</ref> Some English proverbs say a timely intervention prevents problems, such as “a stitch in time saves nine” stitches.<ref>Martin, Gary. 1996. ''A stitch in time saves nine.'' The Phrase Finder. phrasefinder.co.uk</ref> An exceeptionalist is someone who believes or advocates exceptionalism.<ref>Gove, Philip et al. 1961. '' Exceptionalism.'' Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, p. 792. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Company.</ref> For example, an exceptional child is one who needs psychological aid or special education in social adjustment, because of being uncommon from either superior or inferior abilities.<ref>Gove, Philip et al. 1961. ''Exceptional.'' Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, p. 791. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam Company.</ref> So, maybe it's not about being great or wanting to be, or about being qualitatively different either. In 1961 I think they considered it a philosophy of prevention or of intervention.--69.3.118.118 (talk) 05:23, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Linguistics and sociology

This is an interesting piece:

• DeGraff, Michel (17 August 2005). "Linguists' most dangerous myth: The fallacy of Creole Exceptionalism". Language in Society. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 26 November 2020.

There is likely other material of this sort, so an "In social sciences" section may be worth considering.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced statement, twice used with identical wording

Two sections ("Criticism" and "Separateness") contain the same identical sentence, in both cases unsourced:

"This can be an example of special pleading, a form of spurious argumentation that ignores relevant bases for meaningful comparisons."

In an article of this level of thoughtfullness, this is both an obvious copy and paste mistake, and stylistically a shame. Arminden (talk) 08:31, 11 October 2021 (UTC)