Inside the Mind of the Rutgers Professor, Part II: Relativism

Relativism

Rutgers Professors believe there is no such thing as truth. Moral and ethical truths are a matter of cultural constructs and personal experiences. Human action has no value; a terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. If we free ourselves from the moral principles custom and religion bind us to we shall become what Nietzsche called Übermensch, or “Superman.” A Rutgers relativist may wish to justify genital mutilation, genocide and Stalinism with a statement like “who’s to say who’s right?” From this pseudo-thought stems the ridiculous but prevalent notion that proponents of injustice are victims, due to a lack of social, financial, or racial privilege. Therefore, according to the relativist, societies are responsible for the actions of freethinking individuals. After all, “evil” as we have known it is an outdated Judeo-Christian concept, and if relevant, only applies to deeds, not people. “Good” is never defined. Judgment is the only cardinal sin. The irony of the professors’ view is that the relativist position itself is the opposite of relative. It is absolutist! Any moral axiom, for instance, “don’t have sex with babies,” is wrong according to your professor, because it labels an action as wrong. This clearly violates his own view of moral indifference – the view itself is a contradiction.

NJO: Originally printed in the September 2005 issue of The Centurion.