Apakah yang dimaksud dengan Relativisme? Relativisme adalah paham yang menganut kebenaran menurut seseorang belum tentu benar menurut orang lain. Relativisme menganut suatu kebenaran tidak selalu berlaku pada semua orang di segala tempat dan waktu (kebenaran bersifat relatif). Sebaliknya Kebenaran Mutlak berlaku pada setiap orang di segala tempat dan waktu. Paham Relativisme tidak setuju dengan Kebenaran Mutlak / Absolut.

Ketika ada orang yang berteriak ”tidak ada yang mutlak”, bukankah orang tersebut menggunakan kemutlakan untuk menyatakan ”tidak ada yang mutlak” sehingga orang tersebut tidak konsisten di dalam sikapnya. Dan sebaliknya jika orang tersebut tidak memutlakan pernyataan ”tidak ada yang mutlak”, maka pernyataan tersebut pun tidak mutlak dipercaya oleh dirinya sendiri sehingga ada keragu-raguan didalam pernyataannya tersebut. Oleh karena itu di dalam konsep Relativisme kita menemukan inkonsistensi yang merupakan Self Defeating Factor pada paham tersebut.

Paham Realtivisme bisa menyatakan dua hal yang berkontradiksi dapat dikatakan keduanya benar karena kebenaran adalah relatif. Sebagai contoh jika ada ajaran A yang mengatakan Tuhan itu ada dan ajaran B yang menyatakan tidak ada Tuhan, maka paham Relativisme dapat membenarkan kedua ajaran tersebut sehingga ini merupakan suatu hal yang irasional karena kedua hal yang berkontradiksi tidak mungkin keduanya benar.

Paham Relativisme ini sangat disukai oleh banyak orang terutama di zaman ini yaitu zaman Postmodern karena setiap manusia memiliki ego untuk menentukan mana yang benar dan mana yang salah. Manusia pada zaman ini mempunyai semangat ingin menjadi tuhan atas dirinya sendiri. Sehingga jika orang berbuat dosa tidak ada yang dapat / boleh menilai orang itu salah atau tidak dengan demikian orang akan semakin suka berbuat dosa dan dosa akan semakin meluas di dalam setiap bidang kehidupan. Akibat meluasnya paham ini, dunia cepat atau lambat akan kehilangan kontrol dan semakin rusak. Sebagai contoh pernikahan sesama jenis kelamin, bukankah sudah dilegalkan di beberapa negara, dan mungkin saja dalam beberapa waktu ke depan ada legalisasi pernikahan antara manusia dengan binatang karena manusia telah kehilangan arah yang benar. SUMBER

Relativism (in Bahasa: Relativisme) is not a single doctrine but a family of views whose common theme is that some central aspect of experience, thought, evaluation, or even reality is somehow relative to something else. For example standards of justification, moral principles or truth are sometimes said to be relative to language, culture, or biological makeup. Although relativistic lines of thought often lead to very implausible conclusions, there is something seductive about them, and they have captivated a wide range of thinkers from a wide range of traditions.

Relativistic motifs turn up in virtually every area of philosophy. Many versions of descriptive relativism (described below) bear on issues in the philosophy of social science concerning the understanding and interpretation of alien cultures or distant historical epochs. Other versions bear on issues in the philosophy of mind about mental content. Still others bear on issues in the philosophy of science about conceptual change and incommensurability.

Relativistic themes have also spilled over into areas outside of philosophy; for example, they play a large role in today's "culture wars." Some strains of ethical relativism (also described below) even pose threats to our standards and practices of evaluation and, through this, to many of our social and legal institutions. And the suggestion that truth or justification are somehow relative would, if correct, have a dramatic impact on the most fundamental issues about objectivity, knowledge, and intellectual progress.

Relativistic arguments often begin with plausible, even truistic premises--e.g., that we are culturally and historically situated creatures, that justification cannot go on forever, that we cannot talk without using language or think without using concepts--only to end up with implausible, even inconsistent, conclusions. There is little consensus, however, about how to block the slide from inviting points of departure to uninviting destinations.

Both sides in debates over relativism tend to oversimplify the views of the other side. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that relativistic theses often come in two forms: a bold and arresting version, which is proclaimed, and a weaker, less vulnerable version, which is defended--with the first having a tendency to morph into the second when under attack. Relativism also often sounds better in the abstract than it does when we get down to actual cases, which often turn out to be rather trivial, on the one hand, or quite implausible, on the other. But it is also true that most academic philosophers in the English-speaking world see the label ‘relativist’ as the kiss of death, so few have been willing to defend any version of the doctrine (there is less reluctance in some other disciplines). Indeed, many explicit characterizations of relativism are to be found in the writings of unsympathetic opponents, who sketch flimsy versions to provide easy targets for criticism.

Discussions of relativism are also frequently marred by all-or-none thinking. Phrases like “everything is relative” and “anything goes” suggest versions of relativism that, as we will see, often are inconsistent. But to conclude that there are no interesting versions of relativism is to err in the opposite direction. Often the important question is whether there is a space for an interesting and plausible version of relativism between strong but implausible versions (e.g., all truth is relative), on the one hand, and plausible but trivial versions (e.g., some standards of etiquette are relative), on the other.

Finally, relativistic themes are frequently defended under alternative banners like ‘pluralism’ or ‘constructivism’ (with a particular author's line between relativism and pluralism typically marking off those views he likes from those he doesn't). I will use the label ‘relativist’ for all such views, with the understanding that many species of relativism may be plausible or even true. But it is the views, not the labels, that are important.

Section one contains a sketch of the general form of many relativistic claims and maps the general terrain. Section two explores the main things that have been thought to be relative and section three the main things they have been relativized to. Section four presents the chief motivations and arguments for relativism, and section five is devoted to the major responses to the major relativistic themes. After section one the sections, and in many cases subsections, are relatively modular, and readers can use the detailed tables of contents, an index, and hyperlinks in the text to locate the topics of most interest to them.

SOURCE