I think this is about the relative-ness of relativism, but I’m not sure because I can’t know the ultimate truth, or can’t prove it, or can’t convince you of it, I think
I have had a couple of philosophy classes but I am no philosopher. Oh, perhaps we all are, but what I mean is that I cannot converse with a “real” philosopher and I find much of the topic to be mental masturbation - not that that’s necessarily a bad thing?
From the article:
“Not that we can’t know what is true, but that there simply isn’t any objective truth to know. Truth is always truth in context; what is true for one person might not be true for another.”
I taught statics in college (a sophomore level structural engineering course). While there are margins of error, there is nothing in this subject that I find relative. What load can be placed on a simply supported beam before it fails is not different for me than it is for you. Context??? Color me confused.
A real philosopher, in my experience, always has an argument, something about whatever you say that questions some part of it. Once or twice I’ve had real clarity. Not that I’ve had that many “real” philosopher conversations.
Anyway. I posted this before finishing it and when I went back I was surprised how quickly it wrapped up. It’s one of those articles that states some definitions, then says, but those are wrong. I usually have to go back and reread because I had agreed with one of the “wrong” things.
So, I won’t try to summarize his conclusion, but I think he’d agree with you, that “there simply isn’t any objective truth” is wrong.
1 Like
Sure brain teasers are certainly fun.
Don’t suppose you can explain “relative-ness of relativism”
Because it simply sounds like a sexy word play.
I have to wonder, and ask, why it isn’t enough to point out - that every creature has its own unique outlook because it’s looking at the world from within itself and its needs. That has a chance of becoming a self-evident understanding we can work with as we pragmatically learn to negotiate our lives.
How could our existence not be saturated with relativism, we’re all simply biological creatures, living out an individual finite life that was thrust upon us.
Brings us right back to our grand conflict - the relevance and appropriateness, and need for discussing and appreciating the difference between one’s mind and the body/brain that produces it.
Along with the owning the fact that we are simply mortal biological creatures - not gifts from some higher power God, but creatures created out of the dust and biology of this Earth. To actually own that simple understanding, rather than constantly indulging in that sense of uniqueness and superiority that human radiate with such alacrity.
.
It’s always about our “thoughts”. It is worth asking, why not more attention to the creature source of our thoughts, which isn’t some God or “ultimate truth” out there - as so many keep dreaming of. But simply another creature living out its singular precious life.