Title: Chapter 4, Section 2 Relativism
1Chapter 4, Section 2Relativism
2Perspectivism Recap
- Knowledge of the world is a function of the
linguistic and conceptual framework within which
particular knowers and agents live and operate - So far this is compatible with a single shared
conceptual framework (as Kant thought)
3Relativity of Conceptual Schemes
- Many people believe, however, that conceptual
schemes represent fundamental commitments which
can be deeply different among different cultures,
time periods, and communities
4Relativity of Conceptual Schemes
- For example, consider the feminist critique of
science and logic - Analytic, dispassionate, detached
- vs.
- Synthetic, empathetic, attached
5Two kinds of relativism
- Epistemological relativism the content, meaning,
truth, rightness, and reasonableness of
cognitive, ethical, or aesthetic beliefs, claims,
experiences, or actions can only be determined
from within a particular conceptual scheme
6Two kinds of relativism
- (2) Ontological relativism reality itself is
determined by the particular conceptual scheme of
those living within it
72 Sources of ER
- (1) Conceptual and linguistic schemes cause
different people to have different experiences of
the world (and so different descriptions of world
are required for different people) - (2) Conceptual and linguistic schemes contain
different epistemic principles
8How Schemes Influence Experience
9How Schemes Influence Experience
- Whorf hypothesis
- what we sense is a function of the linguistic
system within which we operate as cognitive
beings
10How Schemes Influence Experience
- Some Simple Examples
- The peanut in the jar
- The ring
11How Schemes Influence Experience
- Other examples
- 1984 and Newspeak
- Eskimos and snow
- Hopis and the tense-less language
12Different Epistemic Principles
- An epistemic principle is a second-belief about
which first-order beliefs are acceptable - Only accept as true those beliefs for which there
is plenty of empirical evidence - Only accept as true those beliefs that are likely
to promote your overall well-being
13Different Epistemic Principles
- ER claims two things about the variation of
Epistemic Principles - (1) Descriptive claim different people from
different cultures and times hold radically
different epistemic principles - (2) Normative claim since there is no foundation
for any epistemic principle, it is not possible
to evaluate the epistemic principles of others
14Different Epistemic Principles
- Evidence for the descriptive claim
- Primitive people and the laws of logic
15Different Epistemic Principles
- A counter-example to the normative claim?
- The claim being made by relativists is that the
laws of logic are in a sense arbitraryalthough
we use them in all of our reasoning and assess
all reasoning in terms of them, not all people
do, nor must they.
16Different Epistemic Principles
- A counter-example to the normative claim?
- Consider how we use the word and.
- If I know that a sentence of the form P and Q is
true, then I can conclude that Q is true
17Different Epistemic Principles
- A counter-example to the normative claim?
- Now consider how we use the word or.
- If I know that P is true then I can conclude that
P or Q is true.
18Different Epistemic Principles
- A counter-example to the normative claim?
- If logic were really just arbitrary, then could I
not invent a new logical word and assign to it
any properties I want? - Let me introduce a new logical word tonk
19Different Epistemic Principles
- The rules of tonk are as follows
- If you know that P is true, then you can conclude
P tonk Q (just like the way we use or) - If you know that P tonk Q is true then you can
conclude that Q is true (just like and) - But now you can use tonk to prove anything you
want
20Different Epistemic Principles
- I tend to think that tonk shows us something
about logic we do not invent it but rather
discover it. - Tonk is useless because a language that included
it would claim that every possible sentence is
true. A language that does this is not a
language.
21Different Epistemic Principles
- A relativist may not be convinced
- the principles of judgment would themselves be
internal to one scheme or another, and thus any
such exercise would merely beg the question at
issue (p. 79).
22Argument for Ontological Relativism (p. 79)
- Our only access to reality is our experience of
it. - So there is no basis to distinguish between our
experience of reality and reality itself - Since there is no distinction to be made between
reality and our experience of it, it follows that
reality is dependent on our experience of it - Our experience of reality is conceptually
scheme-dependent - Therefore reality is conceptually scheme-dependent
23Motivations behind relativism
- Relativism has become a popular theory of late
because it is supposed to allow us to respect
diversity and avoid ethnocentrism (the belief
that our culture is better and more rational than
all others). - It is seen as an aid to understanding and
appreciating others
24Consequences of Relativism
- (1) The differences between people with different
conceptual schemes is so great that their beliefs
would be incommensurable - Incommensurable means unable to be measured on a
common scale (example what is more beautiful,
that Opera or that painting?)
25Consequences of Relativism
- If the beliefs of two people are incommensurable,
then there is no possibility of translating one
belief into the terms of another. - To do this, the beliefs must be about the same
things and there must be a common concept to show
how the beliefs can be translated
26Consequences of Relativism
- (2) There can be no rational scrutiny of a
conceptual scheme from without that schemeany
attempt to do this presupposes a framework
independent standpoint, but there is none
27Consequences of Relativism
- (3) Truth is relative to frameworksif a society
believes in witchcraft then witchcraft is
efficacious for them, if they do not believe it
is not efficacious for them
28Consequences of Relativism
- In short, if relativism is correct, then people
literally live in different worlds and are using
different conceptual schemes to describe these
different worlds - This is separatism we live in separate worlds
and cannot make contact with each other