Refutation of Relativism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Geremia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Abbadon said:
God says it?
Click to expand...
What if God say’s lots of things to lots of people that contradict each other?

Oh wait…God wouldn’t do that. God would tell only ONE group.

Of course…we are now part of a cosmic guessing game as to which revelation is real, which thought is a result of the holy spirit(not the devil, or our imagination) and which religion is correct.

I guess we could say we would be awefully lucky to get the Lottery of life that is the correct faith and will allow us to not suffer for eternity.

God forbid we could be wrong…

…or that God is not quite the monster people would claim her to be 🙂
 
Kaninchen said:
You’re no fun!

Until they become bored by departmental politics and ever-more boring students (if they’re academics).

Or watching CSI re-runs.
Click to expand...
And then they start creating viral strains to zombify everyone and TAKE OVER THE WORLD.
 
Dameedna said:
What if God say’s lots of things to lots of people that contradict each other?

Oh wait…God wouldn’t do that. God would tell only ONE group.

Of course…we are now part of a cosmic guessing game as to which revelation is real, which thought is a result of the holy spirit(not the devil, or our imagination) and which religion is correct.

I guess we could say we would be awefully lucky to get the Lottery of life that is the correct faith and will allow us to not suffer for eternity.

God forbid we could be wrong…

…or that God is not quite the monster people would claim her to be 🙂
Click to expand...
We could just wing it, realize that people made up alot of stuff in the old days, what without peer review journals and all. Then get on with our lives and hope for the best. Living our lives so as to do no harm unto others. Ignoring our “sensibilities” and actually thinking for a moment before we start to pick up stones.
 
Abbadon said:
[edited] So I’m going to remain skeptical of their claims of absolute knowledge.
Click to expand...
Always the best course. Far, far too many people who really, really, really know what the answer was/is in history.
 
Abbadon said:
Any situation which involves freedom fighters. Cuba? Palestine? Imperial India/Sri Lanka?

Pilgrim conquest of America?

Stolen generation of Australia?

Spanish Inquisition?

To me those situations feel relative as to which side you were on at the time, with the knowledge of the time.
Click to expand...
These instances do not alter the absolute rightness and absolute wrongness of certain actions.
 
Dameedna said:
No, when you said theire are absolutes, you made a very clear statment about the “concept” of absolutes.

You never mentioned anything about morality.

Making a logical argument for “absolutes” makes no argument for moral absolutes at all. It is, as leela has indicated…a strawman.

Not at all. You are the one taking the concept of absolutes and applying it to morality. This is a leap you are making not even remotely based on anything other than a belief that absolutes include moral rules. This is what you have been taught, and it is a clever use of logic that is all.

The relativists are saying that morals are not absolute truths. A quick look around the globe should highlight this to you.

It is not difficult to see why moral choices are not absolute, when we realize that the world is inherantly changing. What was good for humanity many years ago(have lots of babies), is no longer good for us at all as there are too many of us.

Morality is about enhancing human life in the best way we can determine throughout every generation. Jesus taught us a philosphy upon which we can achieve this. Morality has alway’s been about choice and growth. The entire OT show’s this endeavour. The concept of morality being absolute has never entered into the bible or jewish history. For them, it was the journey into understanding God and in an act of humility, they admited their mistakes and shared their process of growth with their children. The word Israel, means those that have been broken by God. Their history of this process, is one of the best accounts we have.

It has never, and will never be one of the absolutes YOU talk about. It changes, along with society.

The Jew’s did not form the 10 commandments overnight. They spent a massive struggle with faith and other communities so that they could eventually figure out a set of rules that would stop them from destroying each other.

The bible has nothing at all to do with absolutes. Quite the opposite. It is one group of humans struggle to understand the meaning of life, and how they can live correctly.

Your modern “absolutes” are an adaption that suits, because science has torn a hole in religion that religion cannot repair, unless it admits it has been wrong.

And people are no longer interested in living the mystery of life and discovering it’s purpose. They, like the pharassies that Jesus critisized ad-nausem are too busy telling everyone else how to live and what the truth of God was, to pay any attention to “God” whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Excellent response! 👍
 
I qualify my position with this: God is absolute, and our understanding of him varies from time period to culture to individual apprehension of the Deity. Absolute goodness rests in his person, and we human beings are called to reflect our Creator’s goodness. The Catholic Church, although it has certainly not completely clarified and never will be able to completely clarify the nature of God, we have Jesus Christ, and his Incarnation is enough, as long as we look through the dark mirror. That’s a bit more specific.

Oh, and someone wrote something about science tearing a hole in religion? What a load of ****. The whole science VS religion dichotomy is a fallacy people use just to see other people lose their rags. It’s a big effing joke. Instead, why can’t it be science AND religion? The two do not necessarily have to be at odds, and anyone who automatically puts them at odds is just spoiling for a fight.
 
Dameedna said:
And people are no longer interested in living the mystery of life and discovering its purpose. They, like the pharisees that Jesus criticized ad-nauseum, are too busy telling everyone else how to live and what the truth of God is to pay any attention to “God” whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Jesus, also, told people how to live and what the Truth of God is all the time.

Jesus was not “cool” with the way people were. He wanted them to allow Him to transform their hearts and minds. He didn’t meet a “sinner” and say, “That’s cool. Be yourself.” Instead, he forgave them their sins and said, “Go, and sin no more.”
 
Numinous said:
Refutation of relativism:
  1. Relativism maintains there are no absolutes.
  2. But by making that claim, it is maintaining an absolute.
  3. Thus, relativism defeats itself and is meaningless.
Click to expand...
I must say that I find snappy answers like this to be a bit of a let down. Relativism is dangerous and leads to “might makes right” mentality…pretty much what Jesus refuted by his whole life and teaching.
 
Yes, if only because it discourages dialogue. It is designed to tell another that his ideas are ipso facto baloney, and that isn’t usually helpful. Relativism is too dangerous for a philosophical conceit.
 
I only said I was disappointed in the way your philosophical argument discouraged dialogue - not that it was wrong. It is a classic. But we must encourage people to think about their approach to relativism And perhaps others might find that kind of reasoning clever enough to embrace. I don’t care how we discourage relativism; only that we do it 🙂 Sorry if I offended.
 
Numinous said:
I qualify my position with this: God is absolute, and our understanding of him varies from time period to culture to individual apprehension of the Deity. Absolute goodness rests in his person, and we human beings are called to reflect our Creator’s goodness. The Catholic Church, although it has certainly not completely clarified and never will be able to completely clarify the nature of God, we have Jesus Christ, and his Incarnation is enough, as long as we look through the dark mirror. That’s a bit more specific.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. As I thought, relativism is just a placeholder for atheism.
Numinous said:
Oh, and someone wrote something about science tearing a hole in religion? What a load of ****. The whole science VS religion dichotomy is a fallacy people use just to see other people lose their rags. It’s a big effing joke. Instead, why can’t it be science AND religion? The two do not necessarily have to be at odds, and anyone who automatically puts them at odds is just spoiling for a fight.
Click to expand...
Okay, science and religion both have their uses. Science is our best attempt to understand reality and our place in it. Religion is our best attempt to undertand…what? Things that aren’t real? It seem to me that if we had good reason to believe th eclaims made by religion, they would be part of our scientific understanding of reality.

Best,
Leela
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top