The Paradox of Relativism: a New Form of Intolerance was born
Rather than dismantling the belief in an absolute truth, relativism has enclosed truth within the individual.
Relativism is a philosophical and cultural movement that upholds the idea that truth, moral values, and the perception of reality are subjective and vary according to social, cultural, historical, and personal contexts. This concept stands in opposition to the notion of absolute or universal truth, arguing instead that what is “true” or “right” differs from person to person, culture to culture, and era to era. In other words, for the relativist, there is no absolute truth, no permanent center of gravity to refer to.
We can outline three main areas where relativism is applied:
Cognitive Relativism: Argues that what we consider true depends on our viewpoint, culture, and the historical context in which we are born.
Moral Relativism: States that ethical and moral judgments are based on the social and cultural norms of an individual or group and not on timeless universal moral principles.
Cultural Relativism: The practices, beliefs, and values of a culture must be understood and assessed within the context of that specific culture. One cannot judge the values of another culture from the outside.
It should be noted that relativism is not a well-defined philosophical current but presents itself in various forms.
The following philosophical views can be cataloged as relativistic: sophism, indifferentism, nihilism, mobilism, Pyrrhonism, subjectivism, individualism, weak thought, pragmatism.*
The Problems with Relativism
One of the main criticisms directed against relativist philosophies concerns the adherence to the dogma that posits the non-existence of universal truths.
Firstly, relativism falls victim to a logical paradox: indeed, to assert that there are no absolute truths is, in itself, an absolute truth.
For this reason, relativism is ultimately a form of absolutism: while it maintains that all opinions are valid, it implicitly leads to a form of dogmatism, in which other absolute views are rejected.
From a practical standpoint, by asserting that there are no absolute or universal truths, relativism can lead to a sort of cognitive indeterminacy. Without solid ground on which to base our reasoning and beliefs, we might face the impossibility of defining shared norms and values.
Since this perspective implies that every ethical system is subjective, it could become difficult to condemn practices considered immoral. If taken literally, this could lead to justifying behaviors that are clearly harmful or unjust.
Relativism can thus cause the disintegration of any moral foundation.
Finally, relativism could result in the paralysis of decision-making processes in legal, political, and social contexts. The lack of universal standards may hinder the ability to reach consensus or implement effective policies, as each perspective is deemed equally valid.
The Paradox of Intolerant Relativism Toward Others’ Opinions
Yet, all these negative aspects could be balanced by the noble aspiration of relativism to recognize and respect the diversity of thought.
In theory, relativism should lead to a more open and welcoming society, where every point of view is worthy of consideration.
However, in practice, the relativism of our times often results in a form of intolerance toward the opinions of others.
In the context of debate, we tend to show increasing intolerance towards anyone who holds opinions different from our own. This growing impatience can, in turn, lead to the closure of dialogue and the elimination of any opportunity for constructive engagement.
In a relativist society, dialogue based on mutual listening and open discussion is at risk of being replaced by monologues among the deaf, where the goal is no longer to understand the other, but rather to assert one’s own view as the only acceptable one.
This phenomenon is contributing to the polarization and fragmentation of society.
A New Form of Intolerance
This polarization creates ever deeper divisions among people and contributes to the isolation of individuals within society.
The end of dogmatism, instead of giving way to uncertainty and open-mindedness, has given rise to a new form of intolerance.
In the era of dogmatism, clashes occurred between groups adhering to different ideologies. In the era of modern relativism, each individual seeks to impose their own worldview on others.
The Concept of Absolute Truth, Instead of Being Swept Away, Lives Within Each Individual.
Rather than dismantling the belief in an absolute truth, relativism has enclosed truth within the monad, within the individual.
Each monad represents a small universe of isolated thought that does not interact with others and primarily seeks to impose its perspective as the supreme truth. On many occasions, these monads even struggle to conceive the existence of other perspectives, thus giving rise to an increasingly pronounced social polarization and fragmentation.
Having reached this point, will it still be possible to open windows to allow communication between different perspectives?
Will it ever be possible to find a way to engage in true dialogue based on real exchange, rather than on continuous attempts to impose one’s own ideas?
Appendix: Relativist Philosophies
Indifferentism: Indifferentism posits that all opinions and perspectives are equally valid, with no distinction between truth or falsehood. This can lead to a devaluation of the search for a shared truth.
Nihilism: Nihilism maintains that life and reality have no intrinsic meaning, and therefore all beliefs are valueless. This can lead to a profound existential meaning crisis.
Mobilism: Mobilism suggests that human beliefs are unstable and can easily change, often influenced by the surrounding context. This perspective questions the stability of convictions.
Pyrrhonism: Pyrrhonism is a form of radical skepticism that questions the possibility of absolute knowledge or truth. This attitude can lead to a continual quest for answers without ever fully reaching them.
Subjectivism: Subjectivism asserts that truth is determined by the perception or subjective perspective of each individual. This can lead to a variety of contradictory viewpoints without an objective basis.
Individualism: Individualism contends that each individual has their own personal truth and moral rules, regardless of society or culture. This can lead to an emphasis on individual autonomy, but it can also result in cultural conflicts.
Sophism: Sophism is a presocratic school of thought. It comes from the Greek word Sophos, which means “wise or “skilled”. Sophists held relativistic views on cognition and knowledge (that there is no absolute truth, or that two points of view can be acceptable at the same time), skeptical views on truth and morality, and their philosophy often contained criticisms of religion, law and ethics.
Weak Thought: The idea of weak thought sketched by Vattimo and Rovatti emphasizes a way of understanding the role of philosophy based on language, interpretation, and limits rather than on metaphysical and epistemological certainties — trying to not fall into extreme relativism.
Pragmatism: Pragmatism, a philosophical tradition that originated in the United States, emphasizes practical consequences and real-world applications as critical components of meaning and truth. It suggests that the truth isn’t an absolute or static entity, but rather something that works and is thus validated by its practical implications.
Traslaten from italian article Il Paradosso del Relativismo e la nuova Intolleranza with the hel of AI.
Publication:
