[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[MarshaV]

'The Truth About Relativism' by Joseph Margolis.        

Last paragraph of Forward:


"Relativism sees itself, therefore, as breaking a temple or two.  Nothing
too grand, perhaps, but a way of letting some fresh air into those closed
buildings of the mind.  Its conviction is that we have and can have no way
of returning to the fixities we were once persuaded "must be there," and
that we must still find a conceptually satisfactory way of holding on to
what we think we _have_ achieved without the pretense of the old securities.
They may be gone forever; and we may still have to face a genuine chaos if
we cannot construct a coherent account of how it is possible to have
achieved a language, a culture, a science, a critical understanding of
having done all that, on the premiss of the flux.  In a larger sense,
relativism presents iself as a philosophy of the free spirit, of all those
unwilling to let _any_ premiss count as privileged or fixed, of all those
unwilling to divide the world between the revealed and the debatable.  There
are no such division, says the relativist.  That is also Protagoras'
implicit reading of Socrates' teaching: "Man is the measure" is the meaning
of "Know thyself."
   There's the denouement intended. So let the paly begin."

Yippee!!! Seems to put the MoQ in the right place, at the right time.