One of the subsidiary paradoxes of relativism is that each of its proponents considers himself an intellectual superior.
Read the whole thing.
One of the subsidiary paradoxes of relativism is that each of its proponents considers himself an intellectual superior.
2 comments:
One of the subsidiary paradoxes of relativism is that each of its proponents considers himself an intellectual superior.
Consider that a fair amount of people I know are relativists. Also consider that these people were known to grasp material in a school setting rather well. They were complimented on their apparent brightness as a result. Why wouldn't they believe themselves intellectual superiors if that is the case?
I understand that a lot of the self-aggrandizing is based on a lack of perspective as opposed to honest-to-God conceitedness. Still, it bears mentioning that their belief of intellectual superiority is independent from discovering and accepting moral relativism. Moreover, doesn't it require a certain amount of intelligence to understand what relativism means in the first place? How can that *not* be an indicator for rating higher on the IQ bell curve?
It also requires a fair amount of intelligence to be able to engage in Biblical criticism or scholarship. But people who do so generally are NOT held to be intellectual superiors, unless they do it with a stated absence of belief in the Bible's overall message.
The point is that the relativist's sense of intellectual superiority comes from his adoption of the "correct" opinions, as opposed to those poor sad bastards who actually believe that they can judge anything. His schooling may be a factor, but people who have taken just as many classes as they have, yet are not relativists, are believed to be inferior because they refuse to accept the truth that there is no truth.
Post a Comment