The theory of absolutism says there is only one correct system for forming beliefs for all people. Serious Relativism stands in contrast to this theory by saying there are different correct systems for forming beliefs from one person to another are one group of persons to another. An example if this is two children, one went to Montessori school and the other went to regular Kindergarten, both begin 1st grade and have the fundamentals they need to be successful learning phonics and math among other things.
There are philosophers who argue rationalism has no distinction between rational belief and locally accepted "rational" belief. To the relativist no idea is without its context. Philosophers will also argue that this summation of a relativist belief is really the equivalent of and absolutist theory which states according the Feldman's Epistemology, "It is always really rational for a person to conform to the locally accepted standards of rationality" (So if you accidentally moved into a nudest colony and cannot afford to move out it is rational to conform and become a nudest yourself). Here lies the problems for relativism. Yes, people are diverse and it is arrogant to assume one's idea's superior to another's, but this is not epistemology.
I think that you're halfway there here... I like the kid examples. Process does matter, and that's part of what a 'serious' relativist is about. But if this is just saying "we all have our own ways of figuring out THE truth", then... that's not so controversial, is it?
ReplyDeleteA "serious" relativist is saying something different. Our 'ways' include definitions of appropriate justification, what counts as truth, etc., so...