The toxic philosophy that has so pervaded our modern society, that of postmodernism, espouses a theory of relativism. This theory says that there is no absolute truth ontologically independent from human belief; rather, truth consists of what people take to be true, and is thus inextricably linked to its epistemology. So if one person says that God is not real, and another that God is real, both are correct. Obviously, this is logically nonsensical.
One interesting way to really demonstrate this absurdity is through transitivity.
Take three societies, each with the following 'opinions':
Society 1: A > B
Society 2: B > C
Society 3: C > A
If all societies are correct, we should be able to consolidate their opinions to reveal truth. Thus,
A > B, which > C, which > A.
Clearly, this is a fallacy. If we are to take all 'cultures' to be equally valid, then we must sacrifice the inference 'if A > B and B > C then A > C'.
However, if we use such deduction as our starting point, and thus accept that truth is absolute, then one of these societies must be wrong. For example, if we take Societies 1 and 2 to be correct, then both premises are fulfilled, and A must be greater than C. Society 3 is therefore WRONG. And so on.
One pertinent application of this idea is that of law. In a multicultural society, it is politically correct to say that all cultures should be tolerated. But how to tolerate a culture of intoleration? How to incoroporate Shariah Law into our Western law, when the point of Shariah Law is to vanquish any other values besides those of Islam? How to allow freedom of speech under the assumption that everybody is right when people preach racism or advocate hate crime?
Lines must be drawn.
No comments:
Post a Comment