Common Fallacies about Relativism and its Relatives “Not many people are consistent either in maintaining relativism or in rejecting it. What we find in their thinking is not pure relativism, but partial relativism. In some cases, as in the postmodernist version of relativism, the relativism cannot be pure because of its sheer incoherency” ~ J. Budziszewski “Practical Responses to Relativism and Postmodernism: Part I,” in Philosophy: Christian Perspectives for the New Millennium, 90.

Definition of Postmodernism: “As a cultural mood, postmodernism is simply the habit of thinking that nothing holds together, that everything is in pieces” (ibid., 95). Truth is fragmented. Instead of believing in a truth that is for everyone, one believes in stories or narratives which are different from everyone. Personality is fragmented. Instead of believing that each of us possess a soul, a self, and an I (identity) who is responsible for choices we make, we exchange our identity for “role playing.” In this context we are… and in this context we are… Life itself is fragmented (There is no ultimate purpose). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

Description of Postmodernism: “Postmodernism is much more difficult to defeat as a mood than as a proposition. It is easy to show that postmodernism is incoherent, but the postmodernist may strike a pose of not caring whether he is incoherent. But it is a pose; so don’t be taken in. When someone tells me that he can do without meaning and coherency, I respond, “You know as well as I do that the longing for meaning and coherency is deep-set in every mind, yours as well as mine. So my question for you is this: What is that you want so badly that you are willing to give up even meaning and coherency to have it? [Ibid., 96].” 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

List of Fallacies about Relativism: Seat-at-the-table fallacy; Socialization fallacy; Erosion fallacy; Many-morality fallacy; Toleration fallacy; Bad-behavior fallacy; Biblicist Fallacy. 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Seat-at-the table Fallacy: “The seat-at-the table fallacy holds that relativism is an error, but on okay error. It’s really good for us, the fallacy runs, because if everyone gets a seat at the table, then Christians get to sit down too. The assumption is naïve, because in reality, only those who do not rock the relativistic boat are allowed a seat at the table. The only Christians who are allowed to sit down are the Christians who deny their faith” (Ibid., 99). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Socialization Fallacy: The socialization fallacy maintains that conscience is merely the residue of the way were brought up. As Christians we must disagree. To be sure, the outer edges of conscience can be modified by the way we are brought up, but the core is standard equipment. If this were not so, then why do you suppose that how children are brought up varies as little as it does? Do you know of any culture in which children are taught not to share, not to play fair, not to be honest? Can you think of one where they are taught to be cowards, and condemned for being brave? It isn’t because we are taught the same rules that we know them; rather, it is because we all know the same rules that we teach them” (Ibid., 99). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com The Erosion Fallacy: “The erosion fallacy is that conscience is not built into us; it can erode and disappear. Many Christians accept this fallacy. They believe that the reason for the prevalence of relativism and other forms of moral skepticism is that the relativists and other moral skeptics have lost their conscience. If St. Paul is right about the law written on the heart, this diagnosis must be erroneous. The problem is not that people don’t know the moral law, but that they tell themselves they don’t. They have much better knowledge than they admit to themselves that they have. They wish to see things less clearly than they really do, usually so that they can do as they please” (Ibid., 100). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Many-Moralities Fallacy: The many-moralities fallacy asserts that moral beliefs are completely different in every culture. No, cultures differ about the details of morality, but not about the basics.” Ex. Though a man may have one wife or four, you don’t find a culture that does not recognize the institution of marriage. “There is a difference between taking a rule very seriously and not knowing it at all” (Ibid., 100). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Toleration Fallacy: “The toleration fallacy holds that tolerating people means suspending moral judgment.” Problem: “Tolerance cannot be practiced by suspending moral judgment. You must exercise moral judgment to recognize that tolerance is a virtue in the first place. You must make further moral judgments in order to know what should be tolerated and what should not” (Ibid., 100). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Bad-Behavior Fallacy: “ This fallacy holds that if people violate the moral law, they must not know the moral law. On the contrary, the moral law is not unknown but merely inconvenient. We know what is right; we just don’t do it. Many people express the bad-behavior fallacy, but few people will defend it when challenged” (Ibid., 100). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Biblicist Fallacy: This fallacy is the notion that the knowledge of right and wrong comes only from the Bible. The issue is not reliance and dependence upon the truth and authority of the Bible. Rather, it is saying that any aspect of God’s truth is known exclusively in the Bible; There is no other source of moral knowledge. However, because of natural theology everyone has certain knowledge about God, truth, and morality. Consider the following: 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

The Biblicist Fallacy: Everyone gains knowledge about God, truth, and morality from these sources and this knowledge harmonizes with biblical teaching. Thus, both sources compliment each other with the Bible being the ultimate, final, and absolute source since it is special revelation. Knowledge from Creation: Psalm 19:1-6 & Rom. 1. Knowledge from Conscience: Rom. 2:14-15. Knowledge from Human Design: Romans 1:26-27. Knowledge from God-ward Longing: Ecclesiastes 3:11; Acts 17:22-34. Knowledge from natural consequences of our actions: Galatians 6:7 Consider reading C. S. Lewis’s The Abolition of Man. 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com In Conclusion: “If you live apart from the Redeemer, then truth really will seem fragmented because you won’t be able to make sense of things. If you live apart from the Redeemer, then personality really will seem fragmented because you won’t know who you really are. And if you live apart from the Redeemer, then life will seem fragmented because you will be unable to grasp its meaning and may simply give up trying” (Ibid., 95). 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com

Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com Bibliography: This work is adapted from J. Budziszewski’s, “Practical Responses to Relativism and Postmodernism: Part I” in Philosophy: Christian Perspectives for the New Millennium, v. 1 (Addison, Tx.: CLM & RZIM Publishers: 2003), 107-122. 11/20/2018 Template copyright 2005 www.brainybetty.com