from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. Philosophy A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. The theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.
- n. A specific such theory, advocated by a particular philosopher or school of thought.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. The philosophical doctrine of the relativity of knowledge. See relativity.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. (philosophy) the philosophical doctrine that all criteria of judgment are relative to the individuals and situations involved
Diversity rooted in relativism is the faith of our age, and it is not difficult to catch the spirit.
We cannot say that relativism is true, because to assert that something “is true” is to assert that there is a standard of truth that is factually the case regardless of which set (s) of conventions we use to describe it.
Once again, your moral relativism is predictable and pathetic.
Moral relativism from the right wing bigot, shocker!
This can be done in a number of ways: Cognitive relativism is a school of philosophic thought that holds that an idea is only true if it [...]
Cognitive relativism is a school of philosophic thought that holds that an idea is only true if it is true within a particular conceptual framework that is subjective to an individual or a particular social group.
For a so-called "conservative" state, this kind of moral relativism is just amazing to me.
It becomes even more appaling when some twisted argument of cultural relativism is made to downplay the crimes the governments of many countries commit against LGBT people.
The moral relativism is either schizoprhenic or downright embarrasing.
So we're left with an anti-relativism argument that traffics in relativism, an anti-corporate argument framed in corporate terms, and an Adorno/Horkheimer name-drop without enough self-realization to notice that the exclusionary schema it's propping up is a mirror-image recapitulation of what Adorno and Horkheimer were warning against.