Relativistic Recoils
This isn't an original piece. My mate Linny wrote this, and since I'm at a brain meltdown, I thought this would be an interesting piece to post. Cheers Linny, all copywrongs are yours =P
"The assertion that all views are equally valid accompanies an underlying assumption that nothing is absolutely true. In fact this is the only situation in which it does NOT matter what you think, seeing as it wouldn’t be true anyway! Roger Scruton famously said “When someone tells you there is no such thing as truth, they are asking you not to believe them. So don’t.” In other words, if it is true that ‘there is no such thing as truth,’ then it is NOT true that there is no such thing as truth. So the statement is not true!"
Take that relativism.
9 Comments:
hey eda,
yeah that is so true, i have heard it before and used it too. its so illogical to say there is no such thing as truth it is unbelievable. what will we come up with next?
glad to see you make a post, i was a little surprised to be honest, keep writing, reading these things is very enjoyable, it doesnt even matter what it says. ... see ya slaters :)
haha...so true, so true :P
as u said, truth is relative. Some things are partly true and others entirely so. semantics can only bring one so far though. staykewleda
Heya Geoff. I didn't mean that truth is relative. Far from it. If you read carefully, I'd assert that there is only one absolute truth.
Its a bit odd to use relativity arguements to prove its own invalidness... like geoff said, its all a matter of whether its partial truths or complete ones. And well, we all know the one and only complete one... :)
Anything that departs from the truth is deception. In other words, partial truths are deceptions as well.
It's perfectly natural and logical to "use relativity arguements to prove its own invalidness".
Mathematical proof is very often made by contradiction, ie. you assume one thing is true, and then you will find something that contradicts something else, and get back to the one thing that must be untrue: your original assumption.
The post is a classic example of proof by contradiction, and no mathematician would ever be able to state that "truth is relative."
That's true, haha no doubt about that. Come to think of it, partial truths arent really true at all. Haha yeah, u all are right! However my point the relativity isnt that proving by relativity is incorrect, its just odd that u disprove relativity by using its nature against its very self. Its contridicting contradiction with itself. Now that was a mouth full...hehe well, eda, it seems your blog is becoming a hot pool for dialog ;)
Actually, its is a greater art to disprove relativity using itself. Think about it, the fact that relativism DOES contradict itself shows that it is a faulty argument.
Just like if we had used a christian worldview to disprove relativity, postmodernists would then say... its "your view". But if we showed them the inherent flaws in their views, on their OWN turf, they would have no choice but to admit to its invalidity.
Look at otherworldviews, pluralism etc... finding out how to turn it against itself is a very difficult but valuable art.
Post a Comment
<< Home