If all determinations are theory-laden; which in absence of a determinate absolute, foundation, or closure, would seem to be a necessity; then those determinations necessarily describe complementary perspectives. Then, it could be suggested, that complementarity functions as foundation, but such complementarity does not reduce to any finalised determination of classically monolithic foundation – i.e., a substance.
The notions of ‘materiality’ and ‘ideality’, are substantial organising principles, metaphors of epistemological architecture following foundational procedures based on subjective and objective assumption.
A ‘positivist’, would be someone who offers monolithic explanation, regardless of what the monolithic principle might be held to be.
In order that the principle of materiality or matter has determinate meaning, it necessarily must exclude or negate. Whatever it excludes, is a neglect that automatically compromises its universality, or any alleged universality that might be ascribed to it, as well as a neglect that inevitably constitutes an alternative perspective, a different epistemological architecture systematically arising through the very determination of neglect or rejection.
Dogmatism arises through the inordinate inhabitation of one particular, epistemological architecture, following the train tracks of that particular, theoretical grid, as an exclusive perspective.