Saturday, May 9, 2009

Absolutely Nothing

>

I like to consider myself a fairly tolerant person. The little things (obnoxious laughter, hair in the sink, tennis balls in the shower) have never really bothered me that much.

Most of my friends would agree that, all around, I’m really easy to get along with.

Despite my generally tolerant milieu, there’s one thing that really sets my hair on fire: relativism, disbelief in the existence of absolute truth. I hate it. As someone who likes to debate, it drives me completely bananas. Oranges, even. Why? There are two basic reasons.

The first is that arguments with relativists become relatively unsatisfying within the first three minutes, because any evidence you submit to the discussion that happens not to fit with your opponent’s belief system immediately falls under the category of “Things to Disregard and Never Think about Again.” Consider the following completely accurate interchange.

Me: Well, according to Dr. Gorriblenschevic, a distinguished theologian in the field of Phlegothomoniatry, jergals actually can dorminate. You see, if the...

Straw Man (or woman): Well, I’m glad that belief works for you!

Even writing about this is causing me internal stress.

The second reason is that arguments with relativists inevitably end with my opponent having no idea exactly how right I am. Unacceptable.

Where does this infernal attitude come from, and how can we stop it?

The current relativistic philosophical climate is the direct byproduct of an unlikely conspiracy between snack food companies, television networks, and politicians.

Studies have shown that the amount of relativistic thinking an individual shows is directly proportional to the amount of time he or she spends sitting on couches. \

Couch-sitting, as we all know, is conducive to snack-eating and television-watching, and vise versa. It’s a vicious cycle. The more an individual eats, watches television, and sits on couches, the lazier he or she becomes. Eventually, forming cogent arguments becomes distasteful, even impossible. The snack food companies and television networks encourage these behaviors via subliminal advertising, knowing full well the philosophical poverty they are creating.

The efforts of these two corporate segments were subsidized in the past by a secret task force in Washington, created by former President Bill Clinton. Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, I was able to obtain conclusive proof of the task force’s existence in the form of memos and secretarial documents. The purpose of this task force seems to have been to proliferate relativistic thinking throughout America, eventually resulting in the re-labeling of perjury as a “lifestyle choice.” A secondary objective seems to have been largely concerned with researching the multiple meanings of the word “is.”

The task force is no longer in existence, due to recent budget cuts. President Obama recently issued a statement communicating his opinion that it was fiscally irresponsible to use taxpayer money to fund such efforts when there were so many failed businesses left to bail out.

Despite the current recession, the snack food companies and television networks have continued to implement their insidious plans.

There are two ways to stem the tide of moral and intellectual relativism. First, boycott couches, televisions, and snack foods. Try armchairs, books, and rutabagas. They have far less corruptive power. One book in particular, the Bible, has been shown to have curious truth-increasing properties.

The second method is a bit more controversial. If you have relativistic friends, lie to them all the time, especially about important things, like whether or not your pet komodo dragon bites. What they lose in limbs they’ll more than make up in a greater appreciation for the truth of absolute truth.

 
Creative Commons License
The Institute for Circular Reasoning by Peter Semple is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.