Eden Hill Journal

Ramblings and memories of an amateur wordsmith and philosopher

My Photo
Name:
Location: Maine, United States

Sunday, May 01, 2005

Relativism

I have to laugh. I was just reading the meaning of the term "relativism" in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy and it seems to leave out what I normally think of as relativism. Relativism as a philosophy seems to insist that all points of view are equally valid. That seems a little bit useless to me since almost nobody would subscribe to that philosophy. It would seem to make a whole lot more sense if relativism were to refer to the philosophy that an individual's point of view is valid because of the individual's belief in it.
For example, 'America is good because I believe it is good' is an example of relativism, in my view. 'I am saved because I believe in Jesus' is another good example. Neither one of these statements offers or even needs to offer any proof other than the individual's belief. The "truth" is relative to the beliefs of the individual and thus the individual is using the philosophy of relativism.
Many would argue that neither of these is relativism because neither would admit that any other point of view is equally valid, but as I see it, that idea isn't necessary. All that is necessary is that an individual's reality is based on his or her beliefs. Another individual with different beliefs would have different perceptions of reality that are as equally valid to that believer as the original perceptions are to the original believer. That seems to me like the real meaning of relativism.
When you practice relativism, real objective reality doesn't really hold much water to you. If, for instance, America's perception is that Iraq has huge stockpiles of "weapons of mass murder" as President Bush claimed, that is the perceived reality in America. I bought into that claim right up to the point where the UN weapons inspectors had the run of the place and were coming up dry even though they should have had access both to the US intelligence on Iraq and the actual locations where those weapons were supposed to be located, yet no weapons were being found. The change in my perceptions was sealed when Bush told the effective UN inspection team to get out so we could begin our war, presumably placing US troops at the receiving end of Saddam's huge stockpile of chemical and biological weapons. Some Americans needed more proof than I did.
The objective reality is that Saddam had no such stockpiles of "weapons of mass murder." But the objective reality had nothing to do with the opinions or beliefs or reality of the majority of US citizens. We believed the relativist perceptions, the perceptions where those weapons were real because we believed they were real.
That was just an example, but it is a good one. Relative realities exist throughout the political landscape and they are very effectively used by politicians to sway public opinion and support, not just for the election of the politicians but for gaining public approval for political policy. The criticism of John Bolton is that he is not so much concerned with objective reality as he is with using relative perceptions to support political policy. If that is the case, and it seems that it might very well be the case, then how can anyone argue that he is the man for the job? Do we really want to endorse relativism as the political philosophy of the United States?

3 Comments:

Blogger Bill said...

Well, Mike, so much for the claim that the U.S. is a "Christian nation" huh? I see nothing at all Christian about what you wrote here.
I do see the convenience, though, of defining a "relativist" as someone who doesn't think his own interests outweigh another's interests as you so clearly explain. That means we don't need to think of ourselves as being relativists when we put our own interests first. That may be handy, but it's anything but Christian. By your definition, Jesus would be a relativist. Go figure...
What I am trying to say here, Mike, is that a more realistic view of a relativist is someone who does believe his interests outweigh the other guy's. What should I call this if not relativism? My needs are more important relative to me. Your needs are more important relative to you. If that's not practical relativism, then what is?
I would venture a guess that you think you stand on the side of the greater good and therefore you can serve your own interests without being a relativist. I'd suggest to you that maybe the world would look a little different to you if you should ever remove your rose-colored glasses and make an attempt to see things the way they really are. Your expressed views are those of a relativist. Try looking at the Iraq war, oil, Globalization, "free" trade, and all the other American interests served by our government though the eyes of God. Would the U.S. look so rosy to you if you did that?

11:28 AM, May 02, 2005  
Blogger Bill said...

Mike. I am what you might call a "born again Christian" who attended and was a member of a fundamentalist church for years until finally I realized my own self-righteousness that existed in me because of my association with a church that looked for the demons and the evil of those who didn't see things our way. We did that in such a subtle way that we didn't see it happening. We thought we were normal decent folks who followed the Lord. But whenever someone challenged our pride and our legalistic belief in the Bible, we just assumed that they didn't know the Lord and that their spiritual source was demonic, although we didn't use that word.
I have come to realize, in large part because of my experience in that church, that faith in the Lord and faith in the Bible is something we as individuals choose to do. It isn't something that God, the Lord, or the Holy Spirit do to us. And since it is something we do by choice, then we can be in error. We can falsely believe. Our beliefs can be relative to ourselves instead of being sourced in absolute truth.
You clearly show distrust when faced with truths you don't understand. I'm not surprised. But when you go around pointing that finger of yours at all those you consider to be lesser than you who are puffed up with your Christian American pride, fingers will point back at you and many of those fingers will be bearers of the truth.
I have asked before, if truth that is relative to one's beliefs isn't relativism, then what is that called? You base your truths on what you believe and then stand by them as absolute, as superior to all other truth. If you are wrong in your beliefs, you may very well be the last person to discover it because you are content to live in your own bubble of beliefs, your own reality, a reality that may very well lie outside of God's Reality. You may well be a Pharisee ready to condemn and execute the next bearer of truth.
Do that if that's what you enjoy doing, but if that's how you choose to lead your life, don't expect others to think of you as a beacon of light in the world.

8:47 AM, May 03, 2005  
Blogger Bill said...

Oh my!! Pardon me!!
Conversing with right-wing Christians is a very educational experience for me, but they have such a low threshold of tolerance, I can't engage them for very long. It's too bad. I really do get a good perspective about how I don't wish to think when I see them expose their inner selves.

8:37 AM, May 06, 2005  

Post a Comment

<< Home