If one accepts relativism as "valid" then it may be applied to anything as "justification." I see not only a dangerous side to it but an avoidance of finding a deeper truth, and in so makes a claim that that deeper truth does not exist, and does not matter. A way of justification and not truth. In many cases it is both harmless and "valid" but relativism has a built in "excuse" which is context. And in the hands of the creative, might lead one away from an underlying truth, should there happen to be one (Just my take on it of course) <<<BB
Relativism "IS" valid in concept, in idea. The only danger presented is from those that are ignorant of it and therefore establish absolute truths in denial of relativism. Relativism is conducive to finding a deeper truth because it forces one to examine the basis of the truth in relation to culture, morality, ethics, dogma etc. In the hands of the creative? That would be those who are knowledgeable of it's existence and would work towards establishing truth. I think exclusion of relativism in the hands of the creative is the danger, it can lead to absolute and universal truths that, when accepted as societal norms, become dangerous to individual expression, most likely the foundation of political correctness which is often illogical at best. Built in excuse? I don't know how you perceive that and have to ask for examples of that application of relativism. On Aug 23, 10:35 am, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 23, 6:44 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Relativism is something I don’t understand. I hear it often in > > here. The way I understand it is that cultural relativism and moral > > relativism or “any” kind of relativism poses things as “true” only in > > a certain context. <<<BB > > > First you say it's something you don't understand and then you say you > > understand it as posing things as true, only in certain context. > > > Have you answered your own question? > > No, as I do not understand it fully > > > Juan: "Hot Peppers are really "Good" for you" (true) > > Billy Bob: "That's true but I have an ulcer so they're "Not Good" for > > me" (true) > > > It's really all the same morally or culturally. There are those who > > think it's sick that some cultures kill and eat dogs/cats, but at that > > same time in their own culture kill and eat other animals as an > > accepted practice. > > I am not concerned with the examples you present. I am concerned > about other examples that might be proposed based on the general > principle of relativism. If one accepts relativism as "valid" then > it may be applied to anything as "justification." I see not only a > dangerous side to it but an avoidance of finding a deeper truth, and > in so makes a claim that that deeper truth does not exist, and does > not matter. A way of justification and not truth. In many cases it > is both harmless and "valid" but relativism has a built in "excuse" > which is context. And in the hands of the creative, might lead one > away from an underlying truth, should there happen to be one (Just my > take on it of course) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
