SalC! I see you.

Hello who dey house?

Syncan: SalC! I see you.

And you saw clearly, how are you the great theologian?

Hmm too many mentions thanks all am very ok now, and out of the hospital,

Kamsified you are still cooking since yesterday? Smh

SalC: And you saw clearly, how are you the bros?

I am fine Sis, I believe you are getting stronger by the day.

Syncan:

I am fine Sis, I believe you are getting stronger by the day.

Very well

By the way I saw the moniker Lovethywillbedon here, hmm one moniker I've missed alongside Lady . Welcome bro/sis happy to have you around

SalC: Hello who dey house?

I dey o. Good to hear from U

SalC: Hmm too many mentions thanks all am very ok now, and out of the hospital,

Kamsified you are still cooking since yesterday? Smh

Welcome dear... I will take this that "you are strong now"... Well, I knw why kamsified is delaying, but make I never talk until she comes...

striktlymi:

It depends on your definition of the word 'truth'.

this reminds me of president bush famous saying, "it depends on how you define 'is'".


Let me sit down and watch this one.

Madam sal c welcome oh, thank God you are back home.

Help us pls with our question,

is it moral to be a relativist?

italo:

Debate yourself. You dont know what you believe or what you don't.

I know what I believe. I know what I don't believe.

This is "A Thread for Catholics."

Whatever.

Syncan:

You see, that is the problem. Are you still considering "appropriate behaviour" relative or absolute? If it is relative, why do you need to change another person's view? You can see that in doing so as you suggested, the relativist is already considering his "appropriate behavior" as superior to the one he wants to change, this is leaning towards absoluteness. This is why I made the post below earlier:

Um I don't believe that is the case. Wanting people to accept and follow a particular way of life or belief system does not really suggest that the belief system or way of life is superior. It only brings to the fore, man's fundamental nature of wanting to conquer.

Being a Relativists is basically about giving someone else an excuse for his/her actions and not necessarily saying that the actions are in themselves good. In this regard, we can say God himself is a Relativist.

That's why it is possible to see some of our fore father's, who partook actively in the killing of twins 'yesterday', in Heaven. Relativism actually rely on the perspectives of individuals.

Would it be right to charge a mad man for indecent exposure if he chooses to go about in his 'birthday suite'? The mad man sees what he sees. Acknowledging that the mad man is not guilty for that action (unlike the case of one who is sane) is what I think Relativism is about.

italo: Guys, let us consider for a second:

Even the relativist's proclamation: "truth is relative"...is an absolute statement.

Relativism has neither moral nor logical legs to stand on.

God doesn't make mistakes.

...but is truth not relative?

I think that Relativism is an attempt to let people know how unfair it will be to use one 'measuring stick' to judge the actions of men.

Ubenedictus:

this reminds me of president bush famous saying, "it depends on how you define 'is'".


Let me sit down and watch this one.

Does that imply that your definition of "truth" would reveal how Relative "truth" really is?

striktlymi:

Um I don't believe that is the case. Wanting people to accept and follow a particular way of life or belief system does not really suggest that the belief system or way of life is superior. It only brings to the fore, man's fundamental nature of wanting to conquer.

Being a Relativists is basically about giving someone else an excuse for his/her actions and not necessarily saying that the actions are in themselves good. In this regard, we can say God himself is a Relativist.

That's why it is possible to see some of our fore father's, who partook actively in the killing of twins 'yesterday', in Heaven. Relativism actually rely on the perspectives of individuals.

Would it be right to charge a mad man for indecent exposure if he chooses to go about in his 'birthday suite'? The mad man sees what he sees. Acknowledging that the mad man is not guilty for that action (unlike the case of one who is sane) is what I think Relativism is about.

So you are saying that Mary Slessor and those presently championing for Human rights, including the church, are doing so due to "man's fundamental nature to conquer"?

I do not believe the bold is what relativism actually is, Relativism does not seek to excuse, no, it actually believe it should be so for the one. When a relativist talks of "excuse", then it means he already acknowledges the objectivity of the particular truth from which he seeks to excuse the one. This is no longer relativism in its strict sense, and makes nonsense of the relativist stand. The Christian God is not relativist, He made a set of commandments, Christ told the apostles to preach his gospel to the whole world, It means he wants the whole world to acknowledge the His good news as objective/absolute, this is not relativism.

My question on your last example will be "Why did you call that man mad"? and "What constitutes Indecent exposure"?

striktlymi:

...but is truth not relative?

I think that Relativism is an attempt to let people know how unfair it will be to use one 'measuring stick' to judge the actions of men.

You seem not to get him, If "truth is relative" is a relative statement on its own, why then will someone say it in an argument? If before you start a statement, you say "whatever I'm going to say is relative", of what value will your following statement be held?

Syncan:


So you are saying that Mary Slessor and those presently championing for Human rights, including the church, are doing so due to "man's fundamental nature to conquer"?

No one, except God can tell for sure why people do stuff. A good act does not necessarily mean that the act was done out of pure intent. Judas Iscariot is a good example of this.

Syncan:
I do not believe the bold is what relativism actually is, Relativism does not seek to excuse, no, it actually believe it should be so for the one.

@Bold: That suggests Relativism seeks to justify the actions of men, however wrong. Relativism is not about allowing people to do whatever it is they perceive to be right. That alone is a fine recipe for anarchy.

Relativism seeks to show that believing different things does not necessarily mean that any one or more persons are lying. It only show that the truth as humans are concerned is dependent on a number of factors.

You for instance, may have turned out to be a champion for paganism if no Christian missionary had come down to Nigeria. Or better still, you may have been protestant, if all we had were protestant missionaries. In a nutshell, man is a product of his environment, for the most part; and that is where the excuse comes in.

Syncan:
When a relativist talks of "excuse", then it means he already acknowledges the objectivity of the particular truth from which he seeks to excuse the one. This is no longer relativism in its strict sense, and makes nonsense of the relativist stand.

Not exactly! The excuse only seeks to explain the differences in human behaviour, our belief system and what we have come to ultimately accept as true. The excuse doesn't mean that the Relativist believes that his own version of what is true is objective or not borne out of his own personal experiences.

Syncan:
The Christian God is not relativist, He made a set of commandments, Christ told the apostles to preach his gospel to the whole world, It means he wants the whole world to acknowledge the His good news as objective/absolute, this is not relativism.

An aside: I actually do not believe there is anything like a "Christian God". I believe God is the Father of us all. It matters not whether we know this or not. It matters not how we choose to worship him e.g the Christian formula, Muslim formula, Hindu etc. What matters is our response to the sincere revelation of him.

Now, God himself is the author of Relativism. This is the very reason why our fore fathers had a chance of making Heaven. If there is no Relativism then we are saying in effect that only Catholics would make Heaven.

Syncan:
My question on your last example will be "Why did you call that man mad"? and "What constitutes Indecent exposure"?

1) A man is accepted as mad when it has been clinically established.
2) Indecent exposure is as defined by law.

Syncan:

You seem not to get him, If "truth is relative" is a relative statement on its own, why then will someone say it in an argument? If before you start a statement, you say "whatever I'm going to say is relative", of what value will your following statement be held?

Okay!

My point really is that to hold a view that people's point of view with regard to what they consider true is dependent on the various socio-cultural factors and life's experiences cannot be said to be against good morals.

"For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey...."Matt 25:14-30

We all grew up in families, it matters not what type, it consists however of more than one person. As we grew, responsibilities are shared and each one makes himself useful in some ways, we hear often...hardworking child, lazy bones, good for nothing child, full of promise, etc. So it is in the family of God, "those who God has chosen" 1cor1:28. Each of us needs to make use of our talents, in what way you say? "In doing good", I reply. What contribution do I bring on a regular basis to the family of God. Oh I cannot preach, but do I encourage the preacher? Remember both the apostle and the encourager gets same reward...Matt 10:42 . Again, If I cannot talk the talk, can I walk the walk? Remember it is the one who walked the walk, that stay at the right hand, and is rewarded... Matt 25:34-46. What can I offer, my time? My money? My intellect? My presence? My property? My words of encouragement? There is something for me, there is somewhere I can make myself useful for the glory of God and well being of my fellow men. That's what I'm called to do today, Make myself Useful as a member of the family of God. then and only then, will I experience the fullness of joy, for "they are happy, whose God is the Lord". Ps 33:12.

Good morning brethren, a splendid day ahead to all.

striktlymi:

No one, except God can tell for sure why people do stuff. A good act does not necessarily mean that the act was done out of pure intent. Judas Iscariot is a good example of this.



@Bold: That suggests Relativism seeks to justify the actions of men, however wrong. Relativism is not about allowing people to do whatever it is they perceive to be right. That alone is a fine recipe for anarchy.

Relativism seeks to show that believing different things does not necessarily mean that any one or more persons are lying. It only show that the truth as humans are concerned is dependent on a number of factors.

You for instance, may have turned out to be a champion for paganism if no Christian missionary had come down to Nigeria. Or better still, you may have been protestant, if all we had were protestant missionaries. In a nutshell, man is a product of his environment, for the most part; and that is where the excuse comes in.



Not exactly! The excuse only seeks to explain the differences in human behaviour, our belief system and what we have come to ultimately accept as true. The excuse doesn't mean that the Relativist believes that his own version of what is true is objective or not borne out of his own personal experiences.



An aside: I actually do not believe there is anything like a "Christian God". I believe God is the Father of us all. It matters not whether we know this or not. It matters not how we choose to worship him e.g the Christian formula, Muslim formula, Hindu etc. What matters is our response to the sincere revelation of him.

Now, God himself is the author of Relativism. This is the very reason why our fore fathers had a chance of making Heaven. If there is no Relativism then we are saying in effect that only Catholics would make Heaven.



1) A man is accepted as mad when it has been clinically established. Objective or relative
2) Indecent exposure is as defined by law. Objective or relative

Whenever my post is broken up like you did, i kinda become disinterested. I however think you are going by your definition of relativism, taking objectivism where you feel comfortable and jumping back to relativism where comfortable. Truth is that relativism means, i should not take your posts for its worth, for they are relative in themselves. More so the catholic teaching of a place of purgation actually takes care of your problems with our forefathers.

striktlymi:

Okay!

My point really is that to hold a view that people's point of view with regard to what they consider true is dependent on the various socio-cultural factors and life's experiences cannot be said to be against good morals.

Oh yeah? How good is my morals, when I hold a view "that people's point of view with regard to what they consider true (which includes burying people alive with corpses, killing twins, dedicating people to Idols, outcasts/osu), is dependent on the various socio-cultural factors and life's experiences", hence nothing should be done to change it.

How powerful is the rosary?

polkabluedot: How powerful is the rosary?

As powerful as you think it is...

When theologian are discussing, peeps like us will just grab popcorn and watch... Nice topic for dicussion @uben, this is the first am hearing of that word.. Am learning...

polkabluedot: How powerful is the rosary?

Dearest, why not go through the thread below for some testimonies. You can experience yours too, taste and see.

https://www.nairaland.com/1468705/famous-rosary-miracles-believers/1#18643608

Syncan:

Dearest, why not go through the thread below for some testimonies. You can experience yours too, taste and see.

https://www.nairaland.com/1468705/famous-rosary-miracles-believers/1#18643608

I have gone through it. I just need a miracle.

polkabluedot: I have gone through it. I just need a miracle.

Persist in faith, your miracle may just be close by. May she, the blessed Virgin, intercede for you.

striktlymi:

...but is truth not relative?

I think that Relativism is an attempt to let people know how unfair it will be to use one 'measuring stick' to judge the actions of men.

No.

You don't think relativism is an attempt to let people live as they like and do whatever they like without control, using any measuring stick?

Syncan:
Whenever my post is broken up like you did, i kinda become disinterested. I however think you are going by your definition of relativism, taking objectivism where you feel comfortable and jumping back to relativism where comfortable. Truth is that relativism means, i should not take your posts for its worth, for they are relative in themselves. More so the catholic teaching of a place of purgation actually takes care of your problems with our forefathers.

Not really! I am looking at the substance in the definition of Relativism and forming an opinion (which is purely mine) based on that. I believe that is what the whole concept of words and meanings are all about.

Relativism does not stop humans from agreeing to have a point of reference which ultimately becomes an 'objective' base. The constitution for instance need not be all true, from our individual perspectives, for us all to agree to use that as our reference point. That is it becoming our objective base.

This is also the case when it comes to Christianity. Our acceptable base for objectivity is whatever God chooses to reveal. Without this revelations, we will be like sheep without a shepherd, as the Master (Jesus) made us understand. In order words, every Christian would be stuck to their own version of what is true.

Probably, I am not making myself very clear. Relativism, for me, is not denying that facts exists, it is accepting that there are factors which stands to mitigate the reality of some facts for which we cannot be held accountable. Given that it is no fault of ours.

italo:

No.

You don't think relativism is an attempt to let people live as they like and do whatever they like without control, using any measuring stick?

I believe some people would want to use Relativism in that regard but this is not saying that is what I believe Relativism should be about.

striktlymi:

Not really! I am looking at the substance in the definition of Relativism and forming an opinion (which is purely mine) based on that. I believe that is what the whole concept of words and meanings are all about.

Relativism does not stop humans from agreeing to have a point of reference which ultimately becomes an 'objective' base. The constitution for instance need not be all true, from our individual perspectives, for us all to agree to use that as our reference point. That is it becoming our objective base.

This is also the case when it comes to Christianity. Our acceptable base for objectivity is whatever God chooses to reveal. Without this revelations, we will be like sheep without a shepherd, as the Master (Jesus) made us understand. In order words, every Christian would be stuck to their own version of what is true.

Probably, I am not making myself very clear. Relativism, for me, is not denying that facts exists, it is accepting that there are factors which stands to mitigate the reality of some facts for which we cannot be held accountable. Given that it is no fault of ours.

Is the definition of relativism now relative? Am I in this debate based on your opinion of what relativism is, or does it actually have an objective definition? Relativism has no place for truncating one truth over another, Its stand is that everything known as true is true for the people involved. However, Killing of twins is wrong,there was no "agreement" to stop it, the people where told the truth; they knew the truth and it set them free.

You had earlier told me you disagreed with my term "Christian God", while not taking cognizance of the circumstance in which it was used. Now you talk about Christians agreeing to what God has revealed, through mohammed or budha or Jesus I must ask. Going foward, there was no agreement to use what God has revealed, God gave the ten commandments to the Israelites, It was absolute, it was not based on their agreement. When the Israelites turned away to other ..."truths" according to you...they were punished, they were not excused, why, because they were not free to pick "truths" based on agreement. As a matter of fact, they had agreed upon a "truth"...to make a golden calf...we saw what followed.

The bold is not what relativism is, no, even the reference you sent me to didn't say that about relativism, it is just what you think it is as you rightly said. Maybe when you come back to what it really is, then you'll see why I made my opening statement.