Final answer:
The question delves into whether we live in a world that has moved beyond the Meinong-versus-Russell/Quine debate to a post-modern perspective that considers multiple realities shaped by language and subjective interpretation. It touches on the nature of reality, how it is understood, and whether one objective reality exists or multiple subjective realities coexist.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question addresses the philosophical debate regarding the nature of reality. The discussion lies at the intersection of philosophy and metaphysics, touching upon the ideas of Alexius Meinong, Bertrand Russell, Willard Van Orman Quine, and Charles Sanders Peirce, along with post-structuralist and post-modernist thoughts. The Meinong-versus-Russell/Quine debate is about the ontology and the existence of objects, where Meinong suggested that non-existent objects may still have a being, while Russell and Quine aimed for a more restrictive ontology that did not commit to such entities.
Post-modernist thinkers have debated the concept of multiple realities versus a singular, objective reality (reality 1). In arguing against an objectively knowable reality, post-modernism posits that our understanding of reality is limited to interpretations (reality 3), which are subjective and varied (multiple realities). This stands in contrast to the Logical Positivists who considered religious and metaphysical statements meaningless if they weren't verifiable by empirical means.
The idea of multiple realities is also linked to the language we use and how it shapes our perception of the world. Post-structuralists argue that language is context-specific, which means that a statement's verifiability can differ based on individual experiences and cultural backgrounds. As such, contemporary debate continues to explore these philosophical questions, on our understanding of reality, the role of language and experience in this understanding, and the possibility of arriving at absolute truths.