Relativism by a relativist?

[St_Francis]

I was asked to find articles or other material by a relativist abut relativism. I also heard that this was not to be found.

Anyone know of something I could pass along?

thanks

PS The person who asked complained because the only material I ever presented was Catholic materials against relativism. I personally felt that the person shold find his own material, but it did get me curious and I couldn’t find anything.

 

[reggieM]

You could start here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativism

 

[St_Francis]

You could start here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativism

Thanks, Reggie

 

[Spirithound]

I was asked to find articles or other material by a relativist abut relativism. I also heard that this was not to be found.

Anyone know of something I could pass along?

thanks

What value could that author possibly think his work would have? It’s only valid for himself…

 

[St_Francis]

What value could that author possibly think his work would have? It’s only valid for himself…

:lol: Can I use that? It’s perfect!

 

[Spirithound]

:lol: Can I use that? It’s perfect!

Absolutely! I like to say the 2/3 of what I say is quoting someone else’s work, and the other 1/3 is meant to be quoted by someone else
Actually that’s the first time I said that, but I might start using it…

 

[Langdell]

Francis,

I recommend the first chapter of The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory, by Richard Posner. Here’s a link to it at Amazon:

amazon.com/Problematics-Moral-Legal-Theory/dp/0674007999/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1325685196&sr=1-1

Posner is a senior federal judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and a professor at the University of Chicago. He’s of Jewish background but is an atheist as far as I can tell. Very smart guy and very highly regarded by academics. Your friend should not have any complaints about his credentials as a secularist.

Anyway, in the first chapter of this book, he distinguishes among various flavors of moral relativism and explains his own position, which he terms “pragmatic moral skepticism.” He acknowledges that his position is “a version of moral relativism” (p. 12).

 

[FaithfulAndTrue]

What value could that author possibly think his work would have? It’s only valid for himself…

I like that. It’s similar to what I usually say: A relativist only thinks relativism is true because his culture tells him it is.

 

[FaithfulAndTrue]

I like that. It’s similar to what I usually say: A relativist only thinks relativism is true because his culture tells him it is.

It’s also an effective argument against the biological argument against religion. People who believe that we believe in God only because we are biologically predisposed to do so only believe that because they are biologically predisposed to believe so. It’s a self-defeating argument.