From: BillR54619-AT-aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 14:31:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re:  Re: PKF: (Re-) Introducing myself


In a message dated 9/30/97 11:56:47 AM, Carsten wrote:

>But then again, 2.000 years of church politics, 2.000 years of prosecution,
>extermination of other religions, crusades etc. hardly supports the
proposition 
> that "absolutists" are more "tolerant and patient"...

Pardon me if I keep a tight rein on this discussion. But I have asked you a
simple question ("Why" - with respect to refusing to turn the other cheek)
and I have yet to find where you have answered the question, though backed up
in my mail queue, there is probably a lot of background data whereby I could
construct a hypothesis. Is that what you want me to do ?

As far as 2000 years of this and that and the other thing, 2000 years is a
long time, and the sentences quoted above really don't define the issue one
way or the other. Perhaps you, Carsten, assume that I am prepared to adopt
your world view. Perhaps that is a vain hope. What else can you expect from
an "absolutist" ? 

Let's keep this discussion on point. Do you think that Marcus Aurelius, as a
Stoic, was a relativist or not ? And whether or not the answer is "yes" or
"no", do you think it matters with respect to the persecution of Christians
by the Roman 
state ?

> (and yes, I do know that other religions like Islam and Buddhism
> have rather blooddripping histories, thank you very much - but
> there is little doubt that the Christian faith and its church beat
> everybody when it comes to absolutist intolerance, cf. the church
> history).

I don't see any substantiation for either assertion. Islam is a special
problem, since the concept of "holy war" is embedded rather deeply in Islamic
teaching and thinking - the current issue of _First Things_ deals with this
matter. But my take on relativism requires comparisons of this sort to be
based on observable facts and not unsupported assertions. (In _First Things_,
Father Neuhaus actually goes so far as to complain that his organization has
tried and failed to establish a dialogue with faithful Muslims on public
policy issues of common interest and concern - hardly the attitude one would
expect of an "absolutist" bent on eradicating his theological opponents.) 

Perhaps you know what you are taking about with respect to Islam and Buddhism
having "bloodripping" histories, but I don't know what you are talking about.
Consequently, the position of the (Catholic ?) church in relation to these
other religions is likewise undefined. I can conjecture a point of reference
(i.e. "humanist values") but not the value judgements made with respect to
that hypothetical reference point. Duh....

Bill R.
**********************************************************************
Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu