Is Relativism Right?
Hey Folks!
So today's topic is Morality, Relativism, and of course, the all assuming question circulating both. Is Relativism correct in it's viewpoint? Is there absolute truth? How does this pertain to life? Well, in my class this week, I wrote the following paper on these subjects and mostly their status surrounding the question, "Well, that may be true for you, but it isn't true for me." I will say that by no means am I an expert on these subjects or have a perfect view in any regard, but I hope that you enjoy it at some level. :) I am merely stating facts.
I don't mean to start any fights or "word tussles" on here at all, just a viewpoint. This exercise mainly was a huge help in my convictions and in the solidarity with which I believe in the most important absolute truth of today: God. :)
So grab some snacks and a positive outlook and enjoy!
- Lindsay
“Well, that may be true for you, but it’s not for me.” We have all encountered this statement before in conversations with believers and nonbelievers all over. It is the perfect way to end a disagreement, or even end a conversation in which the receiver does not like or believe in what is being presented to them. At least, that is what our, “whatever” and, “truth is what you want it to be” world would say. There are a number of problems with this approach, the main issue of which is that this statement and idea behind it, that of Relativism, are an illogical and hypocritical circle that goes round and round itself with no end. According to Wikipedia Relativism is the idea that views are relative to differences in perception and consideration. There is no universal, objective truth according to relativism; rather each point of view has its own truth. I would like to present at least one validation to show that this statement and the belief it propagates is irrelevant and faulty.
Joseph Goebbels, the Third Reich’s Minister of Propaganda was a very well known man in the Nazi Power of Germany. He made this statement, “Today there seems to be one absolute thing; Relativism.” He was a noted and respected member of the Nazi party and held some very strong views of an anti-Semitic nature. He claimed that his passion was to see the individual raised up to a place of freedom, self-choice, deliverance, and power. That was merely the honey he used to slicken the slide of death and destruction for those deemed “unworthy” by the eyes of the Reich. In his view, the atrocities committed during the reign of the Third Reich are reasonable in order to bring about his view of freedom, self-choice, and power. As we are well aware of, the Third Reich was known for unspeakable crimes and horrors during WWII and was responsible for the gruesome deaths of over six million people of Jewish blood, let alone the countless millions who fought against them. The Nazis were also very forceful in their attempt at control in Germany and enforced several rules and regulations that were punishable by death. Does that sound like the idealistic freedom and peace-loving fairy-tale version of “Relativism” that Joseph Goebbels preached about? Since his belief was in freedom and choice, his behavior followed that however in his version of freedom he denied millions theirs. This is faulty thinking of relativism. Unless you can turn to the gaunt and haunted faces of those who perished under their regime and say “well, morals are whatever the Nazis say they are, and therefore they are following truth as it is for themselves. So, they are right in their own truth.” You couldn’t do it. Likewise, it is an easy way for mass murderers like Stalin, Mussolini, or any one of the many serial killers and rapists to say that they define morality because it is truth to themselves. You see, one can say that “there is no absolute truth” that applies to all people, or that morality is merely a word and a perception for the individual and you would be placed in an ambiguous gray area of doubt. Where does the line start? Where does morality begin and end? And who is to say what it should be? Paul Johnson stated, “If you depart from moral absolutes, you go into a bottomless pit. Communism and Nazism were catastrophic evils which both derived from moral relativism. Their differences were minor compared with their similarities.”
What we fail to grasp is that there is always an absolute truth. Morality is inherent and part of every individual whether we agree or not, and it shows itself in a variety of forms whether good or bad. Our world is a logical world, and likewise, as logical people we cannot have both, we must have one. I read a quote once that stated the following; “Wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it. Right is right even if no one is doing it.” We say today that the individual decides what is “right” or “wrong.” Our very nature differentiates right from wrong, even as a very young child can blush at a lie and know that they are doing wrong, the very sign of a “conscience.”
Besides this, telling someone that truth or morality is only what is perceived by oneself, and that each individual is entitled to their own perception is a lie. The person making the statement is enforcing his own idea on the other, whether they choose to believe it or not. “You’re making universal claims that relativism is true and absolutism is false. You can’t in the same breath say, ‘Nothing is universally true’ and ‘My view is universally true.’ Relativism falsifies itself. It claims there is one position that is true – relativism!” (Paul Copan “True for You, But Not for Me.”) Essentially the person saying, “Well that may be true for you, but it isn’t true for me” is enforcing their own view that there is no absolute truth, but if there is no absolute truth, then relativism is again, a lie. Relativism says that there is no absolute truth, only personal perception of individual truth. If there is no one truth, then how can one say this with confidence and enforce this idea on others? It is an illogical ring of doubt and demise.
Well then, if Relativism is an illogical ring of never ending nonsense then where do we find hope? Where is the stand upon which our doubting feet can be placed? Like Hitler’s reign of terror, the damaging effects of Relativism could be endless, however the contrast is that there are absolutes and their is ultimately one absolute from which we can all derive our understanding, and that is in the Creator God and in His Word which is God breathed. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” There is a God, He loves us, He created us for a unique purpose, and He sent His son Jesus to die for our sins so we could attain an eternity of peace.
Paul, a devout follower of Christ and well-versed man of Law stated the following. “Our appeal does not spring from error or impurity or any attempt to deceive, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never came with words of flattery, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness.” (1 Thessalonians 2:3-5) Paul is speaking on the motives behind the movement of Christianity, and likewise, Christ Himself. It is not out of flattery, or as a relativist would like to believe that power is in their own hands by deciding morality or truth for themselves. It is not in greed by using this falsified banner of freedom to restrict humanity and derive from it personal gain as the Nazi Regime did. It is a movement centered around a truth that is selfless in itself and motivated by a humility and true concern for humanity that works together for the greater good of those involved or not. As mentioned before, Relativism implies that there is peace and happiness in personal truth, but Christianity centers around a far more impacting goal and mindset.
Psalm 119:160, “The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.”
So today's topic is Morality, Relativism, and of course, the all assuming question circulating both. Is Relativism correct in it's viewpoint? Is there absolute truth? How does this pertain to life? Well, in my class this week, I wrote the following paper on these subjects and mostly their status surrounding the question, "Well, that may be true for you, but it isn't true for me." I will say that by no means am I an expert on these subjects or have a perfect view in any regard, but I hope that you enjoy it at some level. :) I am merely stating facts.
I don't mean to start any fights or "word tussles" on here at all, just a viewpoint. This exercise mainly was a huge help in my convictions and in the solidarity with which I believe in the most important absolute truth of today: God. :)
So grab some snacks and a positive outlook and enjoy!
- Lindsay
"It may be true for you, but it’s not for me."
-A Critique-
“Well, that may be true for you, but it’s not for me.” We have all encountered this statement before in conversations with believers and nonbelievers all over. It is the perfect way to end a disagreement, or even end a conversation in which the receiver does not like or believe in what is being presented to them. At least, that is what our, “whatever” and, “truth is what you want it to be” world would say. There are a number of problems with this approach, the main issue of which is that this statement and idea behind it, that of Relativism, are an illogical and hypocritical circle that goes round and round itself with no end. According to Wikipedia Relativism is the idea that views are relative to differences in perception and consideration. There is no universal, objective truth according to relativism; rather each point of view has its own truth. I would like to present at least one validation to show that this statement and the belief it propagates is irrelevant and faulty.
Joseph Goebbels, the Third Reich’s Minister of Propaganda was a very well known man in the Nazi Power of Germany. He made this statement, “Today there seems to be one absolute thing; Relativism.” He was a noted and respected member of the Nazi party and held some very strong views of an anti-Semitic nature. He claimed that his passion was to see the individual raised up to a place of freedom, self-choice, deliverance, and power. That was merely the honey he used to slicken the slide of death and destruction for those deemed “unworthy” by the eyes of the Reich. In his view, the atrocities committed during the reign of the Third Reich are reasonable in order to bring about his view of freedom, self-choice, and power. As we are well aware of, the Third Reich was known for unspeakable crimes and horrors during WWII and was responsible for the gruesome deaths of over six million people of Jewish blood, let alone the countless millions who fought against them. The Nazis were also very forceful in their attempt at control in Germany and enforced several rules and regulations that were punishable by death. Does that sound like the idealistic freedom and peace-loving fairy-tale version of “Relativism” that Joseph Goebbels preached about? Since his belief was in freedom and choice, his behavior followed that however in his version of freedom he denied millions theirs. This is faulty thinking of relativism. Unless you can turn to the gaunt and haunted faces of those who perished under their regime and say “well, morals are whatever the Nazis say they are, and therefore they are following truth as it is for themselves. So, they are right in their own truth.” You couldn’t do it. Likewise, it is an easy way for mass murderers like Stalin, Mussolini, or any one of the many serial killers and rapists to say that they define morality because it is truth to themselves. You see, one can say that “there is no absolute truth” that applies to all people, or that morality is merely a word and a perception for the individual and you would be placed in an ambiguous gray area of doubt. Where does the line start? Where does morality begin and end? And who is to say what it should be? Paul Johnson stated, “If you depart from moral absolutes, you go into a bottomless pit. Communism and Nazism were catastrophic evils which both derived from moral relativism. Their differences were minor compared with their similarities.”
What we fail to grasp is that there is always an absolute truth. Morality is inherent and part of every individual whether we agree or not, and it shows itself in a variety of forms whether good or bad. Our world is a logical world, and likewise, as logical people we cannot have both, we must have one. I read a quote once that stated the following; “Wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it. Right is right even if no one is doing it.” We say today that the individual decides what is “right” or “wrong.” Our very nature differentiates right from wrong, even as a very young child can blush at a lie and know that they are doing wrong, the very sign of a “conscience.”
Besides this, telling someone that truth or morality is only what is perceived by oneself, and that each individual is entitled to their own perception is a lie. The person making the statement is enforcing his own idea on the other, whether they choose to believe it or not. “You’re making universal claims that relativism is true and absolutism is false. You can’t in the same breath say, ‘Nothing is universally true’ and ‘My view is universally true.’ Relativism falsifies itself. It claims there is one position that is true – relativism!” (Paul Copan “True for You, But Not for Me.”) Essentially the person saying, “Well that may be true for you, but it isn’t true for me” is enforcing their own view that there is no absolute truth, but if there is no absolute truth, then relativism is again, a lie. Relativism says that there is no absolute truth, only personal perception of individual truth. If there is no one truth, then how can one say this with confidence and enforce this idea on others? It is an illogical ring of doubt and demise.
Well then, if Relativism is an illogical ring of never ending nonsense then where do we find hope? Where is the stand upon which our doubting feet can be placed? Like Hitler’s reign of terror, the damaging effects of Relativism could be endless, however the contrast is that there are absolutes and their is ultimately one absolute from which we can all derive our understanding, and that is in the Creator God and in His Word which is God breathed. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” There is a God, He loves us, He created us for a unique purpose, and He sent His son Jesus to die for our sins so we could attain an eternity of peace.
Paul, a devout follower of Christ and well-versed man of Law stated the following. “Our appeal does not spring from error or impurity or any attempt to deceive, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never came with words of flattery, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness.” (1 Thessalonians 2:3-5) Paul is speaking on the motives behind the movement of Christianity, and likewise, Christ Himself. It is not out of flattery, or as a relativist would like to believe that power is in their own hands by deciding morality or truth for themselves. It is not in greed by using this falsified banner of freedom to restrict humanity and derive from it personal gain as the Nazi Regime did. It is a movement centered around a truth that is selfless in itself and motivated by a humility and true concern for humanity that works together for the greater good of those involved or not. As mentioned before, Relativism implies that there is peace and happiness in personal truth, but Christianity centers around a far more impacting goal and mindset.
Psalm 119:160, “The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.”
Comments
Post a Comment