Absolutism vs. Relativism Fallacies:
"I Know I’m Right, But…"

"I Know I’m Right, But…"
March 8, 2000

by Lynn Ridenhour

I don’t want to be a relativist but neither am I comfortable with becoming an absolutist. Both camps have their slippery pitfalls and both can lead you into a dead end ditch. Besides, who wants to be a real turn-off?

I find it interesting—a recent Gallup poll has shown that 50% of Americans expressed serious concerns about fundamentalism—camp of the Absolutist. Only 36% expressed a similar concern about secular humanism—camp of the Relativist. Could it be, everyone’s getting real nervous with all the religious mudslinging Bush & McCain have been hurling at one another here lately? My Lord, I have never heard so much talk about religion and Jesus and Bob Jones and Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell during an election year! What is it with these guys?

Back to my point. I don’t want to be a relativist and neither do I want to be an absolutist. It’s like wanting to hang out with Lemuel and Laman. Why pick the lesser of two evils? Both choices are bad. Of course, I’m using a bit hyperbole. My point, however, is: relativism and absolutism both have their weaknesses. And as "good Christians," we’re to avoid both.

Let’s briefly look at…

WEAKNESSES OF THE RELATIVIST:

Let me tell you,

 

1. It’s tough these days being a secular humanist, a relativist.

   Denying God’s existence does have its consequences. Atheist Jean-Paul Sartre said it best, "…no finite point has any meaning without an infinite reference point." And Sartre went on to sum up life’s meaninglessness in the title of his book Nausea. Life without consequences can be one big throw up. Camus, another noted writer, followed Sartre’s conclusions and proposed the only really serious question is whether or not to commit suicide. Dostoevsky, in Brothers Karamazov, nails the dilemma—"…if there is no God, everything is permitted."

   As I said, it’s tough being a relativist these days.  Another weakness…

2. Relativists are really absolutists in disguise.

   Many of their statements are self-refuting. For instance, the Greek philosopher Gorgius made the statement that "…all statements are false." The problem with this is that if all statements are false, then the statement that all statements are false is false. Each of us, at one time or another, has heard someone say, "…but there are no absolutes." That’s like my saying, "…there are absolutely no absolutes!" Or "…I hold to the truth that there are no truths."

   Another example:  many of my colleagues maintain a radical relativism that forbids us to judge another culture. Yet they (rightfully) oppose any form of oppression against women and racism. Dilemma:  if we lack a sufficient basis to judge another culture, how do we have a basis to judge our own?  Likewise, many in the academic world despise anti-Semitism, yet their philosophy provides no basis for condemning it.  Not that it shouldn’t, mind you.

   The upshot of the matter?

   Sooner or later all positions of this sort lead to some kind of judgment about what is good for our world, our country, our lodge, our neighbor and our dog. We may not call it "good," but C.S. Lewis says "…their skepticism about values is on the surface…" We may debunk others’ values while unable to realize that our own are not so immune.

   Here’s another weakness…

3. Everyone is right and no one is right.

   I’ve heard that a lot. Or versions of it. If whatever is true for you is true for you, and whatever is true for me is true for me, then everybody is right and nobody is right. What a strange state of affairs. There is not what one might call "true" truth—objective truth OUTSIDE of one’s own subjective preferences.

   Here’s a tough statement for the relativist:  "God exists."

   Assertion:  that statement must be either true or false.

   Another assertion: If God exists, then no amount of unbelief will make Him cease existing.

   Still another assertion:  If God does not exist, then no amount of belief will make Him exist.

   Three tough assertions for any relativist.

   Here’s another weakness…

4. There is no evil.

If there are no absolutes (if truth is relative) then, really, there is no evil. Problem:  we know better. Go visit the "killing fields" of Cambodia, the "ethnic cleansing" in Bosnia and Kosovo, tour the ovens at Auschwitz. Can we really say, "…there is no evil?" I don’t think so. Renowned journalist, Arthur Koestler, took a good hard look at the logical conclusion—"there is no evil"—when interviewing a Japanese expert in Buddhism, who denied the existence of good and evil.

KOESTLER: You favor tolerance toward all religions and political systems. What about Hitler’s gas chambers?

BUDDHIST: That was very silly of him.

KOESTLER: Just silly, not evil?

BUDDHIST: Evil is a Christian concept. Good and evil exist only on a relative scale.

Most of us are not willing to go quite so far. But perhaps we are willing to take a good close look at where such assertions lead us.

There they are—four weaknesses of relativism:

* It’s tough these days being a secular humanist, a relativist.

* Relativists are really absolutists in disguise.

* Everyone is right and no one is right.  And

* There is no evil.

Now let’s turn our attention briefly to the flipside…

Neither should we as believers be quick to embrace absolutism.

WEAKNESSES OF ABSOLUTISM

The key is—how do we proclaim absolutes in a changing world without falling prey to absolutism? By the way, that’s a balancing act. It takes the Spirit of Christ actively engaged in the human heart to believe in absolutes without becoming an absolutist. Bottom line?…

What good is it if we win the argument and lose our soul in the hunt?

That’s why perhaps we should preface our assertions with "…I know I’m right, but…" Let’s always leave room for both listener and speaker to exit gracefully. Kindness heals all wounds.

I know, there’s a backlash these days toward believers who want to maintain an objective basis for law or for any truth. We’re often pegged as those "Bible thumpers" who conjure up media images of "closed-mindedness," "intolerance," and "rigidity." In other words, the very idea that there are absolutes—something really true and really false—brings to the table--accepting absolutes means becoming an absolutist to some people. I beg to differ. The two are not the same.

Having said that, there are, indeed, definitive weaknesses in being an absolutist. I briefly mention four.

 

1. Truth is carried in these earthen vessels.

   All our revelations come to us with a filter attached. We see through a glass darkly (I Cor.13:12). An absolutist implies he has no filter. Though we indeed have a basis for absolutes in our God who has revealed Himself in scripture, infallible absolutes still exist among fallible people. We kid ourselves, thinking we’re in ultimate control. The truth is--our revelations can quickly turn to mush, our hearts to stone, and our pocket books can be in chapter eleven before we cross the street. Yes, we carry this treasure in earthen vessels, knowing full well who’s the potter and who’s the clay.  Humility goes a long ways,especially with one's foes.  Our arguments have not always been wrapped in attitudes becoming of the spirit of Christ.

   Another weakness…

2. Right is not righteousness.

   An old Baptist preacher once told me, "…son, remember, you can be as straight as a gun barrel and just as empty…"

   Right is not rightly related.

   Jesus reminded a group of folks of that very thing in Luke 13. Some were telling Jesus a story of an atrocity committed by Pilate, thinking His response would be "…why, that’s awful! We need to do something…" Christ’s response was a shock. He said, "…unless you repent you will all likewise perish…" Right is not rightly related. Ouch.

   Here’s another weakness of absolutism…

3. Confidence not arrogance.

   There’s a fine line between the two. Should we hesitate to state our case? No. Should we balk at arrogance? Yes. Should we run from pride? At all costs. Someone has said, "…none have more pride than those who think they have none…" The absolutist sets himself up to be ambushed with pride.

4. Might is right.

The unstated theme in absolutism is—might is right. The end justifies the means. Secular absolutism, for example, has committed the greatest of all historical atrocities under the philosophy of Nazism and Marxism. Hitler killed six million Jews, Stalin killed some 60 million, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Mao Tse Tung, untold millions. And sadly, believers have the Inquisition to point to.

There we have it—four weaknesses of absolutism:

	Truth is carried in these earthen vessels.
	Right is not righteousness.
	Confidence, not arrogance.
	Might is right.

I return to my thesis—as believers, we’re to avoid both camps, the relativist camp and the absolutist camp.

Jesus would simply have us to love one another, and let truth cut its own path.

"Would God that ALL the Lord's People Were PROPHETS"

Free Energy • Patriot Saints • Inter-Continental Congress