Logical Fallacy of Proof by Relativism / Escape to Relativism

Proof by relativism is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma.

The logical fallacy of proof by relativism occurs when relativism is assumed and used to defend a conclusion.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Relativism / Escape to Relativism

"Post modernism proves that there is no right or wrong or truth or error. There are only winners and losers. One conclusion is as good as another, but it's a matter of who wins. Our side is winning. We have control of the media. We have control of the schools. We have control of the scientific journals. We have control of the courts to a large extent. Therefore, we can enforce our viewpoint, and that's alright because there is no right or wrong, only winners and losers."

An idea can't prove anything. A self-refuting idea such as Post Modernism certainly can't prove anything.

Roxanne: "destroys all secular thought. However, the trilemma wrongly assumes that there are only three options. There are only three options from the secular worldview, but this worldview filters out two of the options. It filters out Divine revelation and demonic influence. Of those two, Divine revelation is real and verifiable. Everyone who enquires of God finds God. Everyone who comes to Jesus Christ in submission, respect, sincerity, and persistence does find Him. Christ begins to lead that person. Adn that person will come to know Christ with increasing intimacy. Christ will teach that person that the Bible is His Word, without error. And that person will learn to listen to the Voice of God as He speaks to them personally through Scripture."

Sandra: "The fact that every conclusion that I have must be based on either infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking doesn't bother me at all. There is no reality. There is no truth. Life isn't real anyway."

Sandra comes to this conclusion using either infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. The real problem is that Sandra doesn't want a relationship with the Holy God. She doesn't want to turn from darkness toward light. Any excuse will do. However, she knows that God exists. God reveals this plainly that it is not an intellectual problem. It is a spiritual problem. Sandra doesn't want to acknowledge her Creator because she doesn't plan to obey Him.