<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=severiansola@hotmail.com
href="mailto:severiansola@hotmail.com">Lee Berman</A> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">>
> Antonin Scriabin: I might have misunderstood Lee initially, but I think he
was<BR>> > saying that they were all equally unable to claim knowledge of
absolute<BR>> > truth, not that they were all valid and
true.<BR> <BR>> You got me right, Antonin. I think the misunderstanding
came from Gerry, perhaps <BR>> due to a certain anti-relativist position he
may share with many Americans of my <BR>> acquaintance. Within this ideology,
moral relativism is confused with immorality <BR>> or amorality and
denounced. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What I objected to was your assertion that “this means all religions are
equally valid and/or equally false.” If you meant something different from
what this says, the misunderstanding is not mine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for relativism, I spoke of the “silly end” of it, which should suggest
that I do not find the concept of relativism silly in its entirety. This
applies not only to moral relativism, but to the cultural relativism that is
relevant here.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> For Gerry, it might be intellectual relativism which really
bothers him.<BR>> He may not be a Christian but I think he believes that for
every question there is<BR>> a true and correct answer waiting to be found
which does not depend on the point<BR>> of view of the questioner. Kinda like
math. I am interested to know if Gerry<BR>> agrees.<BR> </DIV>
<DIV>I don’t think that that applies to all questions. One could invoke
paradoxes by asking questions which pertained in part to the point of view of
the questioner. One could consider questions about what someone ought to
do. And one could point to surprising observations such as the absence of
counterfactual definiteness in quantum theory.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But in general, I do think that most well-formed questions have correct
answers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> I started a thread once called "What's So Great About Ushas" and
I'm not sure the<BR>> question ever really was answered. My answer is that
Ushas is better than Urth because<BR>> it is closer to Christianity. Worship
of The Outsider is better than worship of Pas<BR>> and his family because it
is closer to Christianity.<BR></DIV>
<DIV>Ushas is better than Urth because Urth is a moribund planet that will be
dead in a few chiliads.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Worship of the Outsider is better than worship of Pas because it is closer
to the truth.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Gerry Quinn</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>