[MD] Marsha's Relativism

[Steve Peterson]

On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:49 AM, MarshaV wrote:

>
> Hi Steve,
>
> Do you have one universal definition of 'slavery'?
>
>
> Marsha
>
>

Hi Marsha,

I could never give a universal definition of "slavery" or any word. I 
think I could give a definition that we both could agree upon, but I 
don't think it would be necessary to do that because I think we both 
already know what slavery is. An ahistorical, transcultural, universal 
definition of slavery would make no sense because slavery is a 
historical cultural phenomenon. I can't imagine that "slavery" has any 
existence outside language or that slavery exists outside of culture. 
Can you? Likewise, "truth" as I understand it has no existence outside 
of culture-dependent language either. I don't see it as referring to 
some Platonic Form.

If we both share an understanding of how "slavery, "immoral," and 
"true" function in language, then perhaps we can agree that it is true 
that slavery is immoral. If you need some qualifier like "all things 
being equal," then go ahead and add it. But unless you really are a 
thorough-going relativist, I think there ought to be some way for you 
to use "slavery, "immoral," and "true" in a sentence that you believe.

Best,
Steve