‘Behind this line is fine’ is fine, says the relativist. ‘As long as you keep
your opinions to yourself then we’ll all get along’ But does the relativist
stay behind the line when he tells you to?
Imagine a multiple car-car collision at a busy junction near your home. It’s
an occurrence that shouldn’t be hard to picture. It may, in fact, strike a
little too close to home, as it did for my family and me in June 1997. Now
stretch your imagination further. Assume we live in a less lawsuit-happy world.
Instead of all parties silently exchanging licence and insurance information and
driving away without admitting even a sliver of blame, every one runs into the
junction to explain his or her side of the story: ‘You pulled out in front of
me!’ ‘But I had the right of way. Don’t you know that red
means stop?’ Pedestrians who witnessed the accident from the curb interject what
they saw. A trucker with an elevated, commanding view of the junction weighs in.
Then perhaps the guilty part steps forward: ‘Well, actually, it was my fault. I
was talking on my car phone. I wasn’t paying attention to what I was doing. I
caused the accident.’
For all the post-accident debate, when a police officer arrives and begins
taking notes, one truth will be clear: an accident happened. And in time, other
truths will be determined. Ultimately, a description of the accident will emerge
that corresponds to reality.
We live our lives relying on the belief that objective truth exists, if only
we can find it. We gather evidence; weigh credibility and truthfulness; make
difficult judgements. In the end, we arrive at a close proximity to truth. We
can make truthful statements that describe with reasonable accuracy how events
really happened. (Or, given the right evidence, we can determine truth regarding
whether the car we bought was a lemon, or how our major life decisions were
right or wrong, or if God is real.) We believe that if we had a helicopter over
every junction and a video camera inside each car to see who is on the phone,
or shaving, or turning up the volume we can even discover truth about "accidents".
Truth is more than our subjective reporting of a car crash. It has objective
existence. It has universal application.
Truth is true even if no one knows it
Truth is true even if
no one admits it
Truth is true even if no one agrees what it is
Truth
is true even if no one follows it
Truth is true even if no one but God
grasps it fully
Although some local authorities have given up trying to figure out who
to blame for car accidents (hence "no fault" insurance), truth matters. And when
the stakes are raised – when a child crossing the street is struck and killed,
for example finding the truth becomes essential. Serious circumstances remind
us that the difficulty of finding the truth is no excuse for not looking.
Enter the relativist. To the relativist, no "fact" is in all times and places
true. He argues that because everyone’s point of view is different, we can’t
ever know what really happened at the accident scene. In fact, the hard-core
relativist says that given the slippery nature of what the rest of us mistakenly
call "truth", we can’t even settle on the fact that the accident actually
happened.
So some people, called "relativists", would answer Pilate’s question ‘What is
truth?’ by saying that each person decides what is true for them. Jesus claims
he is true-for-everyone and not just true-for-me.
What could a thoughtful person say in response?
- If my belief is only true for me, then why isn’t your belief only
true for you? Aren’t you saying you want me to believe the same thing you do?
- You say that no belief is true for everyone, but you want everyone to
believe what you do.
- You’re making universal claims that relativism is true and
absolutism is false. You can’t in the same breath say, "Nothing is
universally true" and "My view is universally true." Relativism
falsifies itself. It claims there is one position that is true relativism!
- You’re applying your view to everyone but yourself. You expect others to
believe your views (the "self-excepting fallacy").
© Dr Paul Copan 1998
