Blogging Ottinger (tim)Another argument against relativism
A friend pointed me to this bit at wikipedia:
It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that’s not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It’s certainty. People love the President because he’s certain of his choices as a leader, even if the facts that back him up don’t seem to exist. It’s the fact that he’s certain that is very appealing to a certain section of the country. I really feel a dichotomy in the American populace. What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?…
Whether you are a fan of the president or not, look at the argument being made: “What is important: what you want to be true or what is true?”
Here well-meaning relativists have been telling me that there is no right and wrong, no true and untrue, and every person should decide for himself (or herself) what is truth and what is not. I’m usually told that after hearing of some ethically gray or dark behaviors, after uttering “that’s not right.”
So imagine my joy at reading such an appeal for a True kind of Truth, not for a personally-determined standard of right and wrong, but an appeal to something bigger and more reliable. Ah, maybe when the comics turn against relativism, the fight is nearly won.
In *my* universe, you’re just plain wrong.
:-) Just kidding.
President Bush is another in the long line of sad liars in political office. Our prior president tried to debate the meaning of the word “is.”
Someday, we might finally realize that abusing the simplicity of the bill of rights is a good example of the dangers of relativism. Sadly, there’s only one person left in Congress who actually believes in (and acts on) the U.S. Constitution (everyone else picks and chooses their favorite elements, and damns the ones they don’t like). If I believed that voting wasn’t an act of force, I’d vote for that guy.
Comment by Jeff L. — 2007-December-5 @ 03:21