The Fallacy of Absolute Relativism
The statement "everything is relative" not only relativizes the absolute but also absolutizes the relative. That is, "everything is relative" ironically becomes a new form of absolute.
To say that "everything is relative" implies that nothing is absolute; however, if the concept of the absolute did not exist, neither would the concept of the relative — for both define themselves in opposition. The notion of “relative” only makes sense if there is something that is not. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that absolute realities and relative realities coexist.
"Everything is relative" is a generalization. And all phrases containing terms like "everything", "nothing", "always", "never" or "ever" tend toward abusive generalization. Indeed, there is nothing more false than a totalizing generalization — whether over time, by claiming something always occurred throughout human history; or over space, by claiming it occurred in every place and culture.
These expressions are often used to simplify reality. Yet, reality is far more complex than it seems. Unlike Newtonian mechanistic physics, quantum physics shows us that phenomena do not always occur in the same way. We speak, rather, of statistical probabilities. In other words, even in science, not everything is absolute.
Moral Relativism
It is in the realm of morality that this fallacy — "everything is relative" — has been most commonly and abusively applied. Moral relativism especially disorients the youth. By asserting that everything is relative, the individual places himself as the measure of all things, rejecting any authority beyond or above himself.
It is no longer Man (with a capital M) as the measure of all things, as Protagoras once said, but rather the isolated individual. Yet a society in which each person considers themselves the sole criterion of truth and value is doomed to fragmentation — like the Tower of Babel. A minimum of consensus is essential for human coexistence.
The human being is simultaneously individual and social. Freedom is a fundamental condition for individuality and must be promoted; but equality is an indispensable condition for social peace and must therefore be cultivated. A society with great inequalities can only sustain itself through dictatorships, armies, and repression. But no dictatorship lasts forever.
It is true that human values can show cultural, historical, and even personal nuances. However, a minimum degree of objectivity is indispensable. Take language, for example: if the meaning of words were purely relative, communication between people would be impossible.
There must therefore be a standard by which we can discern whether a behavior is right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate. Eliminating that standard is to open the door to anarchy, which, as history teaches us, often leads to tyranny.
Even more: why is moral relativism almost always invoked to justify certain behaviors, but rarely used to condemn? Could it be because it serves more to excuse than to demand responsibility?
The Nature of Human Values
In an uncritical and ironic way, many have accepted "everything is relative" as if it were an absolute truth. In the face of this widely spread slogan, it becomes difficult to communicate strong and immutable truths, such as human values.
Human values do not change because they are rooted in human nature, which also does not change. Values such as justice, peace, generosity, solidarity, fraternity, and love remain unchanged through centuries and millennia. What was love in the time of Jacob and Rachel, was love in the time of Mark Antony and Cleopatra, and in the time of Romeo and Juliet — and will continue to be so a thousand years from now.
The way we live these values does not change their validity. The fact that certain people stop practicing them does not make them obsolete. Human values express the essence of the human being in the here and now; and since that essence is constant, so too are the values.
In the well-known fable by Aesop, The Fox and the Grapes, the fox, unable to reach the grapes, declares that they are sour. Something similar happens today with human values: unable to practice them — due to lack of will, effort, or sacrifice — modern man prefers to relativize them, declare them outdated, in order to avoid guilt or self-criticism.
Einstein and the Absolutes of Science
For Albert Einstein, not everything is relative. The speed of light, for example, is a universal constant and cannot be surpassed by any physical body. It is an absolute truth within the realm of physics. Not even the theory of relativity claims that everything is relative — only that the measurements of space and time vary depending on the frame of reference.
The Coexistence of the Absolute and the Relative
The life of another is, to me, an absolute value. My own life is also an absolute value, insofar as I have no right to end it arbitrarily. But that life becomes relative when compared to greater values — such as justice, peace, or love — for which, if necessary, I would be willing to die.
Our life (our time and energy) only finds meaning when dedicated to the cultivation of human values — from the most elevated, such as justice and love, to others more expressive like art or music. For those values, especially the first, many would be willing to give their lives.
Camões said: “Higher values are raised.” Values are not in contradiction with one another, but are articulated in a hierarchy. Life, love, peace, and justice are higher than painting, music, or literature. As the Gospel reminds us, the love of God stands even above love for parents or any other earthly reality.
The Immutability of Human Nature
Human nature does not change — neither over time (from generation to generation), nor across space (from culture to culture). Why have there been societies without science or technology, but never societies without religion? Because religious feeling is part of human nature.
This feeling manifested itself in similar ways in civilizations that never had contact with each other. In the Fertile Crescent and pre-Columbian America, for example, pyramids were built and human sacrifices were performed. These parallels are not explained merely by coincidence or necessity, but above all because the human being is essentially the same everywhere.
There are multiple cultures and civilizations, with differences shaped by geography, climate, or available resources. But these differences are superficial. There is only one model of human development — the one that culminated in Western civilization, responsible for the invention of the wheel, writing, gunpowder, electricity, the radio, television, computer, internet, mobile phone, among others.
Likewise, there is no alternative to Jesus as the way, the truth, and the life. Jesus is the only model of humanity lived in fullness, the only one who fully realized the human potential — moral, spiritual, and existential.
Conclusion - The popular slogan "everything is relative" turns out to be a contradictio in terminis, for it relativizes the absolute and absolutizes the relative. Human, cultural, moral, and spiritual reality is indeed made of nuances, but it rests on foundations that cannot be relativized without grave consequences. To recognize this tension between the absolute and the relative is an essential step toward understanding the truth — and toward living in peace with others and with ourselves.
Fr. Jorge Amaro, IMC