By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: Is China the Triumph of Relativism?
Why do I ask this?
It doesnt matter what people think or say, but the material is all.
People want a better standard of living, and china has developed that.
China claims there are no universal values
Democracy with Chinese characters, Marxism with Chinese Characters and so on.
People do not learn, or care about knowledge, but only the financial awards associated with degrees.
Logic is less important than a political fact. The south China sea is ours because...we say so!
Art and Literature is introspective, art for art's sake, but lacks really punch because it says nothing about the real condition?
The foreign teachers just want to chase girls, or stay home with their kids. You can't change it, might as well accept it.
As the world becomes more and more post modern, more and more 'meh' defining the highest goal as individual self expression, even at the expense of morals, does any body have a right or an ability to criticize China on moral, or philosophical grounds?
It's a ponzi scheme created by pusillanimous westerners so I can understand the assumptions about relativism coming into play.
I've read a bit about relativism, particularly from the mahayana school of Buddhism, which I understand used to be predominant in China. The Hindu writer, Nagarjuna, distinguished between the mundane and the transmundane. As a buddhist, he started with the view that all is meaningless, but because we still need to function in the perceived reality which manifests before us, we can construct systematic processes whereby we can understand the world. People can have an array of ideologies or religions which they subscribe to, the important thing is to be aware that they are only that. This outlook was what influenced Nietzsche's outlook on relativism, called perspectivism which I take to be totally different from that guilty white liberal faculty lounge nonsense that seems to rein today.
In a sense, Nagarjuna and Nietzsche laid the foundations of pragmatism, a philosophical outlook I'm much more comfortable with knowing a crazy person might be adopting, because most vindictive arseholes don't know can't from shouldn't anyhow.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, so it's better that the potential creeps become some kind of nihilist because then they'll lack the motivation to cause the trouble they cause with their idiocy and shallowness combined with purchasing power.
China is in a strange place at the moment. It admits it is not a developed nation, and that work needs to be done. But at the same time, developed nations are still developing, but unfortunately they are developing into nations of people where the latest photo of Kim Kardashians bum is number one on the news.
So I would say, no country has the moral high ground. Mutual respect is the best way forward.
coineineagh:
It doesn't compare. Every nation has its share of shallow people. But shallowness is not enforced in the USA. You might lose friends for expressing political views, but not for for being interested in politics and other non-banalities.
ScotsAlan:
I see your point coin, and yeah, I agree. I had a great chat with some UK guys last night. Me on the left, a thatcherite, and a liberal. No way could we have done that with local guys.
I would say that China is a lot more materialist than relativist. Much (or most) of what you describe relates to seeing the pursuit of money and material goods of various sorts as the highest goal in society.
As for relativism, I am a bit of a relativist myself but this would have to involve the ability to see things from different perspectives. If everything is relative then nothing can be absolute and there can be no single truth.
It's a ponzi scheme created by pusillanimous westerners so I can understand the assumptions about relativism coming into play.
I've read a bit about relativism, particularly from the mahayana school of Buddhism, which I understand used to be predominant in China. The Hindu writer, Nagarjuna, distinguished between the mundane and the transmundane. As a buddhist, he started with the view that all is meaningless, but because we still need to function in the perceived reality which manifests before us, we can construct systematic processes whereby we can understand the world. People can have an array of ideologies or religions which they subscribe to, the important thing is to be aware that they are only that. This outlook was what influenced Nietzsche's outlook on relativism, called perspectivism which I take to be totally different from that guilty white liberal faculty lounge nonsense that seems to rein today.
In a sense, Nagarjuna and Nietzsche laid the foundations of pragmatism, a philosophical outlook I'm much more comfortable with knowing a crazy person might be adopting, because most vindictive arseholes don't know can't from shouldn't anyhow.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, so it's better that the potential creeps become some kind of nihilist because then they'll lack the motivation to cause the trouble they cause with their idiocy and shallowness combined with purchasing power.
