80sU2isBest
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2000
- Messages
- 4,970
Irvine511 said:you're working from a set of assumptions that do not apply to most understandings of what relativism is, especially in a philosophical context.
Not on a theological level, Irvine. Relativism vs. Absolutism, when referred to in a theological discussion deals with the ideas of "is God an absolute being, or is he different, according to the indiviodual's perceptions of him?" and "is truth an absolute standard, or does it change according to the the individual's perception?" and "are morals an absolute standard, or do they change according to the the individual's perception?" .
In that context, the theological context, which is precisely what this thread is, a theological thread, my arguments are certainly appropriate.
Irvine511 said:thus, you cannot extrapolate the idea that anyone can do whatever they want so long as it hurts no one from the dictionary meaning of realtivism
Certainly it does, in a theological discussion. If there is no God or absolute truth/moral values, then it's all relative, and the true humanistic standard of "anyone can do whatever they want so long as it hurts no one" is the only common moral value of the day.
Last edited: