1. SUBJECTIVISM There is no such thing as an absolute truth. Truth is whatever we as individuals or we as a society decide it is.
2. RELATIVISM There is no such thing as an absolute moral principle. What is right or wrong is whatever we as individuals or we as a society decide it is.
3. SCIENTISM Science is the only source of knowledge and what can't be measured doesn't exist.
4. POLITICISM The solutions to all personal, social, and moral problems must be politically determined.
5. DETERMINISM Man has no free will and is simply subject to the mechanical laws of nature.
6. COLLECTIVISM The individual exists for social ends and his greatest good is to serve the political economy.
Showing posts with label Phillosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phillosophy. Show all posts
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Monday, July 27, 2009
Refuting relativism
Relativism is the philosophical position that all points of view are equally valid and that all truth is relative to the individual. But, if we look further, we see that this proposition is not logical. In fact, it is self-refuting.
1. All truth is relative.
1. If all truth is relative, then the statement "All truth is relative" would be absolutely true. If it is absolutely true, then not all things are relative and the statement that "All truth is relative" is false.
2. There are no absolute truths.
1. The statement "There are no absolute truths" is an absolute statement which is supposed to be true. Therefore, it is an absolute truth and "There are no absolute truths" is false.
2. If there are no absolute truths, then you cannot believe anything absolutely at all, including that there are no absolute truths. Therefore, nothing could be really true for you - including relativism.
3. What is true for you is not true for me.
1. If what is true for me is that relativism is false, then is it true that relativism is false?
1. If you say no, then what is true for me is not true and relativism is false.
2. If you say yes, then relativism is false.
1. If you say that it is true only for me that relativism is false, then
1. I am believing something other than relativism; namely, that relativism is false. If that is true, then how can relativism be true?
2. am I believing a premise that is true or false or neither?
1. If it is true for me that relativism is false, then relativism (within me) holds the position that relativism is false. This is self-contradictory.
2. If it is false for me that relativism is false, then relativism isn't true because what is true for me is not said to be true for me.
3. If you say it is neither true or false, then relativism isn't true since it states that all views are equally valid; and by not being at least true, relativism is shown to be wrong.
2. If I believe that relativism is false, and if it is true only for me that it is false, then you must admit that it is absolutely true that I am believing that relativism false.
1. If you admit that it is absolutely true that I am believing relativism is false, then relativism is defeated since you admit there is something absolutely true.
3. If I am believing in something other than relativism that is true, then there is something other than relativism that is true - even if it is only for me.
1. If there is something other than relativism that is true, then relativism is false.
4. No one can know anything for sure.
1. If that is true, then we can know that we cannot know anything for sure, which is self-defeating.
5. That is your reality, not mine.
1. Is my reality really real?
2. If my reality is different than yours, how can my reality contradict your reality? If yours and mine are equally real, how can two opposite realities that exclude each other really exist at the same time?
6. We all perceive what we want.
1. How do you know that statement is true?
2. If we all perceive what we want, then what are you wanting to perceive?
1. If you say you want to perceive truth, how do you know if you are not deceived?
2. Simply desiring truth is no proof you have it.
7. You may not use logic to refute relativism.
1. Why not?
2. Can you give me a logical reason why logic cannot be used?
3. If you use relativism to refute logic, then on what basis is relativism (that nothing is absolutely true) able to refute logic which is based upon truth.
4. If you use relativism to refute logic, then relativism has lost its relative status since it is used to absolutely refute the truth of something else.
8. We are only perceiving different aspects of the same reality.
1. If our perceptions are contradictory, can either perception be trusted?
2. Is truth self-contradictory?
1. If it were, then it wouldn't be true because it would be self-refuting. If something is self-refuting, then it isn't true.
3. If it is true that we are perceiving different aspects of the same reality, then am I believing something that is false since I believe that your reality is not true? How then could they be the same reality?
4. If you are saying that it is merely my perception that is not true, then relativism is refuted.
1. If I am believing something that is false, then relativism is not true since it holds that all views are equally valid.
5. If my reality is that your reality is false, then both cannot be true. If both are not true, then one of us (or both) is in error.
1. If one or both of us is in error, then relativism is not true.
9. Relativism itself is excluded from the critique that it is absolute and self-refuting.
1. On what basis do you simply exclude relativism from the critique of logic?
1. Is this an arbitrary act? If so, does it justify your position?
2. If it is not arbitrary, what criteria did you use to exclude it?
2. To exclude itself from the start is an admission of the logical problems inherent in its system of thought.
Recommended Books
1. All truth is relative.
1. If all truth is relative, then the statement "All truth is relative" would be absolutely true. If it is absolutely true, then not all things are relative and the statement that "All truth is relative" is false.
2. There are no absolute truths.
1. The statement "There are no absolute truths" is an absolute statement which is supposed to be true. Therefore, it is an absolute truth and "There are no absolute truths" is false.
2. If there are no absolute truths, then you cannot believe anything absolutely at all, including that there are no absolute truths. Therefore, nothing could be really true for you - including relativism.
3. What is true for you is not true for me.
1. If what is true for me is that relativism is false, then is it true that relativism is false?
1. If you say no, then what is true for me is not true and relativism is false.
2. If you say yes, then relativism is false.
1. If you say that it is true only for me that relativism is false, then
1. I am believing something other than relativism; namely, that relativism is false. If that is true, then how can relativism be true?
2. am I believing a premise that is true or false or neither?
1. If it is true for me that relativism is false, then relativism (within me) holds the position that relativism is false. This is self-contradictory.
2. If it is false for me that relativism is false, then relativism isn't true because what is true for me is not said to be true for me.
3. If you say it is neither true or false, then relativism isn't true since it states that all views are equally valid; and by not being at least true, relativism is shown to be wrong.
2. If I believe that relativism is false, and if it is true only for me that it is false, then you must admit that it is absolutely true that I am believing that relativism false.
1. If you admit that it is absolutely true that I am believing relativism is false, then relativism is defeated since you admit there is something absolutely true.
3. If I am believing in something other than relativism that is true, then there is something other than relativism that is true - even if it is only for me.
1. If there is something other than relativism that is true, then relativism is false.
4. No one can know anything for sure.
1. If that is true, then we can know that we cannot know anything for sure, which is self-defeating.
5. That is your reality, not mine.
1. Is my reality really real?
2. If my reality is different than yours, how can my reality contradict your reality? If yours and mine are equally real, how can two opposite realities that exclude each other really exist at the same time?
6. We all perceive what we want.
1. How do you know that statement is true?
2. If we all perceive what we want, then what are you wanting to perceive?
1. If you say you want to perceive truth, how do you know if you are not deceived?
2. Simply desiring truth is no proof you have it.
7. You may not use logic to refute relativism.
1. Why not?
2. Can you give me a logical reason why logic cannot be used?
3. If you use relativism to refute logic, then on what basis is relativism (that nothing is absolutely true) able to refute logic which is based upon truth.
4. If you use relativism to refute logic, then relativism has lost its relative status since it is used to absolutely refute the truth of something else.
8. We are only perceiving different aspects of the same reality.
1. If our perceptions are contradictory, can either perception be trusted?
2. Is truth self-contradictory?
1. If it were, then it wouldn't be true because it would be self-refuting. If something is self-refuting, then it isn't true.
3. If it is true that we are perceiving different aspects of the same reality, then am I believing something that is false since I believe that your reality is not true? How then could they be the same reality?
4. If you are saying that it is merely my perception that is not true, then relativism is refuted.
1. If I am believing something that is false, then relativism is not true since it holds that all views are equally valid.
5. If my reality is that your reality is false, then both cannot be true. If both are not true, then one of us (or both) is in error.
1. If one or both of us is in error, then relativism is not true.
9. Relativism itself is excluded from the critique that it is absolute and self-refuting.
1. On what basis do you simply exclude relativism from the critique of logic?
1. Is this an arbitrary act? If so, does it justify your position?
2. If it is not arbitrary, what criteria did you use to exclude it?
2. To exclude itself from the start is an admission of the logical problems inherent in its system of thought.
Recommended Books
Sunday, December 21, 2008
[IF]
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!
--Rudyard Kipling
Typography: IF by Rudyard Kipling from George Horne on Vimeo.
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!
--Rudyard Kipling
Typography: IF by Rudyard Kipling from George Horne on Vimeo.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)