E
Elioenai26
Guest
Relativism can't be hypocritical. Relativism is a concept not a person. The relativist, however is hypocritical. The relativist is a person. Hypocrite is a word reserved for persons.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't think relativism is hypocritical. If relativism were true then it would have to be able to be expressed.
Every educated person in the Old Testament.
Clear? In light of your inability to demonstrate that there things like moral absolutes, you shoot yourself in the foot with your own thread.
My suspicion is that you are here to preach, not to learn. Your OP confirms that.
You should go on... because you haven't answered the question of how prevalent this belief was.
What it more aptly demonstrates is that you need a better example.
You claimed that "many intelligent men and women held to a view that the earth was flat. In fact, this was the popular view held for many centuries." What makes you believe that this was a popular and widespread belief for centuries? Which centuries would those be?
Which long-held tradition were they loathe to relinquish?
Many? How many? According to Stephen Jay Gould, "Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology".
You seem to be appealing to some prevailing false belief that was never (or scarcely ever), well, prevailing.
Why are you trying to argue with me regarding whether or not people believed the earth was flat?
People still believe its flat today.
Look it up. If it's so important for you to disprove my point, please find another way. Your current approach is not working.
I'm merely pointing out that your example isn't a good one. And you still haven't responded to my question: how prevalent was this belief and for how many centuries was it popular?
If you want to make a case concerning morality you better choose a case from that field.
No, you just misunderstood me. The line is between that which has been proven/demonstrated and that which hasn´t.
It´s just that all cases of proof happen to have taken place in the physical.
No, it´s a well founded bias against truth claims that aren´t proven.
Yes, I am, and that´s why the above paragraphs in your post wasted both of our time.
Exactly my point.
Yes, that´s why I said: The best way to do away with a relativistic attitude in a certain question is to present proof.
Give of "moral truths" that have been proven (in a similar way as the shape of the earth has been proven, so that I have an idea what you are talking about, and so that I can see the relevance of your example.
Thanks.
Why are you asking me? I have supplied you with a list of names, not exhaustive of course.
I'm asking you because you claimed that it was a popular belief among educated men and women for centuries. Yet you seem unable to provide any evidence for its popularity or for how long it prevailed among scholars.
The real face of relativism is a Christian trying to explain away Yahweh's genocide of entire races.
The real face of relativism is a Christian trying to explain away Yahweh's genocide of entire races.
As thunderf00t put it, "if you can justify this as good, is there anything left to call evil?"
You seem to be under the impression that without believing in moral absolutes you can´t have a strong opinion and you are unable to act."Hey, if genocide works for you, then do it! After all, there are no absolutes, everything is relative!"
Sure a subjectivist can pass judgement - knowing fully well that all judgements are subjective.The relativist's reply:
"Good? What is good? Evil? What is evil? There are no absolutes remember? All is relative and subject to the preferences and opinions of the person. Good and evil alike are mere words with no objective meaning! Therefore, no judgement can be passed upon the Christian for believing what he does. What's true for him may not be true for you!"
You seem to be under the impression that without believing in moral absolutes you can´t have a strong opinion and you are unable to act.
This is a non-sequitur. In a world without moral absolutes you can even fight for your opinions quite fine - without becoming a hypocrite.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?