This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Epistemology / Language / Contemporary Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Epistemology Philosophy of language Contemporary philosophy Linguistics: Philosophy of language This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Philosophy of language task force.

... and have still no idea what Latitudinarianism is. Someone please explain it to the daft layman that I am. Use an example if necessary. Thanks. Maikel 22:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC) reply

It couldn't be simpler. Boleslaw ( talk) 07:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

The word itself seems extremely long and pseudo intellectual rather then constructive and informitive. I wonder if this philosophy is not philosophy at all and the article should be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WitsBlomstein ( talk • contribs) 02:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC) reply