Absolute and relative truth

Have you ever been in a discussion involving statistics, science, or other known facts and the person you're talking to tells you there are no absolute truths? Do you even know what they mean by that statement?

The statement about there being no absolute truths was made popular in the late 1870s when Fredrich Nietzche wrote "There are no eternal facts, as there are no absolute truths". An absolute truth is a statement which is true for everyone independent of all other factors or context. A simple example would be that my name is Sheila even if you think it's Shelly. Just because you forgot my name or thought I said Shelly doesn't change the fact my name is Sheila. Also, my name is still Sheila even if everyone else you've talked to has told you my name is Shelly. In fact, it can be argued that the statement about there being no absolute truth would actually be making the statement an absolute truth. To convince everyone there's no absolute truth you would have to believe there is at least one absolute truth that applies independently of all other factors and context and the one absolute truth would be that there's no absolute truths. The idea is based on circular and faulty logic. The statement nullifies itself.

By reading more about what Nietzche meant, it can be understood he believed all truth is relative. A relative truth is one based on an individual's perceptions of the world around them, their feelings, or what they believe to be right or wrong independent of proven facts or the context of the belief. There can be some truths which fall under this category. If a person is deaf, colorblind, or lacks the sense of smell, their truth about noise levels, the color of the sky, or the odor of skunk spray won't match up to what other people experience and believe to be true. And who knows, there might actually be people who like all odors who think skunks smell great. That said, not all truths are relative. Gravity is a proven, scientific fact. If someone who simply chooses to believe gravity "may be true for you, but it's not true for me" jumps off a building, they'll quickly discover gravity isn't a relative truth. Their truth may have been they would simply float in there air, but their version of the truth will be proven not to be true the second they start plummeting to the ground.

Most of the people I've met and discussed this topic with have told me I'm crazy. If they insist truth is relative, I'll insist the Eiffel Tower doesn't exist. As they continue to insist it's real, I ask them to prove it. They'll pull out their smart phone and show me several pictures of the tower and web pages about who designed it, when it was built, etc. I tell them all the pictures were computer generated and the historical information is a story about a fictional tower in France. Until I go to France and touch the metal, I won't believe it exists. My relative truth is based on the fact I've never seen or touched the real thing. In fact, if I take that further, my relative truth is that France really doesn't exist because I've never been to that country. All of this does sound crazy, but my argument is based on relative truth.

Absolute truth and relative truth are tied together. In order to insist that all truths are relative, a person must rely on the statement being an absolute truth. The person is saying it is absolutely true that all truth is relative. If all truth is based on what an individual believes to be true, why do people insist that everyone else must believe there are no absolute truths? Why won't they accept when the person they're trying to convince turns their theory around on them and says "that may be true for you, but it's not true for me"? Because relative truth can't be absolutely true, not everyone has to accept the theory that all truths are relative. A person can choose as their relative truth the fact there are absolute truths.

Anyone who believes in all truths being relative are following the teachings of a philosopher who couldn't live out his own theory. Nietzche nullified his own theory through his words. He stated there are no absolute truths, which must be an absolute truth in order to be believed. He also nullified his statement about all truths being relative because in order to convince people his theory was true, the statement must be an absolute truth, not simply a relative one. Everyone else can nullify his theory, at least in their personal lives, because he left the door open for people to say about his theory "that may be true for you, but it's not true for me". Either there are at least some absolute truths or all truths are relative. You can't have it both ways.