culture, discussion, philosophy, Politics, religions


People used to believe that Time is absolute which means that ” there is one standard, imaginary clock, that tells the time throughout the universe.” Albert Einstein claimed that is wrong. he believes that Time is in fact relative. ” what the time is depend on how fast one is moving relative to the speed of light” (his view is now universally accepted among physicists)

The ethical relativists change the whole conception about ethical standards. they believes “what is right and wrong depends on what where you are, when you are there, or maybe even who you are” 
“One reason relativist hold this position is that they will regard standards of right and wrong to be dependent upon or internal to particular societies, specific situations or individuals lives. outsides these, standards of right and wrong, good and bad, beautiful and ugly are simply inapplicable”
Relativism can be used in many things, in politics, economics, societies, religions and so on.  Do you agree or not with the concept of relativism ? share you thought here

source i used :
The philosopher’s toolkit  p137-138

3 thoughts on “relativism”

  1. You know, this is very interesting.
    I think relativism will exist whether we agree with it or disagree. Relativism is what creates a “bond” between two socities: what i think is wrong and unethical, you think is right and i have to suck it up and respect your viewpoint.

    I very much believe in ethical relativism. There are so many things in the two very distinct societies I’ve lived in that i think is unethical and morally wrong, but what they think is the exact opposite. Instead of taking a stand and saying “I think this is wrong and you should stop it know”, i have too read between the lines and understand FULLY why this society chose their way of x, y, z.

    It all depends on the situation. For example, there is a society where killing one’s parent after they’ve reached a certain age limit was a common thing. Now, our society would agree that that is morally and ethically wrong, but what they believe is that people were better off in the afterlife if they entered it while still physically active and vigorous.

    If thats what they believe, than for socities to function, they have to accept and respect other socities viewpoints, if they don’t we would all be attacking each other until God knows when.

    I am sorry I’m rambling on, i just liked this question very much =)

  2. Broken wing,,
    i have to say that you always surprise me with your intelligent thoughts..
    i really learn a lot from ur respond,, i will comment later with part of what u said,,
    but for now , i have question, don’t u think that there is an absolute truth, which can’t be change,,
    for example, killing people,
    some people that is morally wrong and can’t be justified in any time in any society,,
    do u think that relativism can be applied to that?

    waiting eagerly for ur answer

  3. Hello again, Murtadha =)
    "don't u think that there is an absolute truth, which can't be change,,
    for example, killing people,
    some people that is morally wrong and can't be justified in any time in any society,,
    do u think that relativism can be applied to that?"
    –> On the subject of killing, i don't believe absolute truth exists, i believe relative truth exists because killing varies depending on circumstances.

    If there was an absolute truth on killing, then no one in the world is allowed to kill anybody.
    although that sounds appealing, lets take a step back and look at the problems it may cause.

    First, capital punishment would be a joke to everyone because no murderer, serial killer, etc would be sentenced to death. Like i've said previously there are socities that view killing as a sacred cultural aspect. They view killing as a common thing; and if that was taken away from them, then problems between societies will ascend.

    Lets take the death sentence in the US and Saudi as an example. In the US, the ones that are eligible for the death sentence are murderers and capital offenders. In Saudi, it goes for the same way (more or less). Now, in the US they usually
    1) hang a person
    2) electrocute them
    In Saudi, they cut off their heads with a sword.
    Both societies view their perspective on killing differently (and for saudi its a religious perspective), but if there was an absolute truth on killing (No one is allowed to kill anyone), no one will coincide because every society views objectives differently. not to mention, They are too stubborn to even consider an absolute truth, so relativism has to always apply.

    PS: I don't know if i answered your question exactly because i didn't know if you were asking about my views on absolute truth or my views on killing =). Let me know if i didn't fully answer, i will be happy to clarify

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s