If one loves logic and intellect, then one will also have no problem recognizing and pointing out contradictory statements that are put forward in an argument’s defense. I have discovered that the doctrine of moral relativism is cluttered with these contradictory statements. Among these, one specific statement will always stand out to me when speaking of the flaws of moral relativism, and it goes as follows:
“There is no objective moral truth.”
This statement, which is the centerpiece and cornerstone of moral relativism and the deepest part of its doctrine, completely and utterly destroys its own argument by doing two things. The first being that it completely contradicts the very thing that it claims to support and defend: truth. One cannot declare, in such a manner that would suggest the declaration of an objective truth, that there is no objective truth! As a result of this, the second thing that this flaw uncovers is the absolute ludicrousness and foolishness that one possesses when they claim to support and defend truth, all the while they continue to support and defend this contradiction.
Perhaps a moral relativist, when declaring such a statement, is actually expressing what their inner core believes; but again, what could they possibly gain from surrendering themselves to truth other than an official self-recognition of their own foolishness? The source of such foolishness, however, might not be pure foolishness or blissful ignorance, but rather, the source may very well be stubborn arrogance; for if the source was pure foolishness, then it would be utterly foundationless, since foolishness, after all, stems from a denial of fundamental reality. On the other hand, logic and intelligence are not foundationless; for if, instead of being deeply rooted in truth, they were foundationless and illogical, they would become foolish, as well.
Yet again, if the source of this foolishness were to be blissful ignorance or total apathy, then a moral relativist would have no reason to be altruistic toward their fellow man or woman, and would revert to total immorality; yet it is not so, since moral relativists recognize that even murder is immoral, thus expressing the belief that they simultaneously claim to reject.
I will end this argument on that note.