|
|
Re: Religion and ethnocentrismBrian Michael Howell (bmhowell@ARTSCI.WUSTL.EDU)Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:42:23 -0500
> > A few questions for Brian: > *since when are women styled as "girls"? > *since when are androcentric statements performed by only boys (or men)? > *since when was Soren Kierkegaard invoked into the postmodern hall of fame? > *was there a woman arging about your hateful "truths"? > *since when was your religious belief more "true" than someone elses belief > of the "truth" of their religion? > *why is "the truth" that conflicts with your own bother you so much? > *is this an ad hominum attack? ;-) (answer: no) > Excellent questions all. Lets see if I can provide any satisfactory relpy. 1. the use of "girls" was a joke. (haha?) 2. Since never. good point. 3. He's not. However, I believe that your use of his concepts of "subjective" versus "objective" truth was a postmodern (and non-Kierdegaardian) use of the word "truth" 4. "Hateful Truths?" First of all, since when are women the only ones capable of expressing nonadrocentric thought? (see #2) Secondly, (and this kind of takes in your other questions) to hold a view that is mutually exclusive (e.g. the out of africa theory vs. the multiple evolution theory of human development) and to argue that one is right and the other wrong is not to hate the people you disagree with. I may disagree with you, but I don't hate you. :) I would never have a problem with someone who says that my beliefs are wrong and theirs are right. Even concerning matters of religion, at least there can be a discussion. But if one side asserts that there is no truth or (even more exasperating) that there are several "truths" then discussion is over before it began. It is the common problem with relativism and I think it is not only wrongheaded, but ultimately not helpful in aleviating intolerance or violence in any form. Regards, BMH
|