When in Rome..., do what is RIGHT.
I think that this kind of apathy reaches far wider than that borders of the United States. When the popular theory leaves no room for criticism of others or for progression than it is hard to have an oppinion or a belief that something is wrong. Relativism is death. Of the soul, of the spirit, and of progress. I'm not saying that it hasn't served a purpose. As a reaction to emperialism it serve its purpose well. In the increasing interconnected world, where cultural bounderies no longer dictate communication boundaries, one can hardely go around trying to "make the world England" (or the USA, which seems to be the more current practice). But for a theory that is supposed to promote tolerance and understanding, it rules them out and leaves enforced acceptance. The biggest weakness of relativism isn't its impact on external societies, it is its impact on the internal. We can look out all we want with a spirit of non-interference (or minimal interference), but within our own society all we can say is that a practice is correct because we do it, even if we are deadset against it.
And even though this seems to be a purely academic from of apathy, it isn't just a problem of the academics. In order to promote better cultural understanding, this theory has been widely accepted by the educational systems of the world, so even without knowing and contiously adhering to the theory it is ingrained in everyone from the beginning of their education.
What we need is a system that has room for criticism, such that we can say "I understand that their cultural practices are different from ours, and that they have every right to practice them, but I still believe them to be wrong," so that when we look at our own society we can say "There is a common sentiment that such-and-such practice is acceptable, however it is wrong and should be changed." The tolerance that relativism is supposed to promote in our views on external cultures can be held as an objective virtue that promotes non-interference, while allowing us to criticize our own culture and actively try to change it. Without this, all we can do is sit back and observe, without passing a judgment, since that judgment could not be put to any good use.
Relativism leads to apathy, apathy leads to inaction, inaction leads to stagnation, and stagnation is never progress. The irony of this should not be missed, relativism was viewed as a step forward, and I am asking us to take an apparent step backwards. But, if a path leads to a dead end, shouldn't we back track to the point where we can find another path that leads us somewhere?
I'm planning on writing my senior seminar (the lengthy paper that I have to write and defend in order to culminate my Philosophy Major and get my BA) on this. Which is why I can't take credit for the title of this post, the title was suggested to me by my currect advisor (a really smart man that goes by the name of David Seligman, PhD). My current working title for my paper is "Personal Accountability within a Socially Deterministic Framework"..., but that may change. Should their be interest, when I have my sem done (sometime in May 2003), I will post it in the Cosmos forum so that I can get somemore feedback than what will be given to me when I have to present and defend it infront of all of my profs and many of my peers. Until then, this is all I am saying.
Sorry that I once again got lengthy (a personal vice), but you touched a nerve. I support your sentiment. Apathy will be the death of us.
Peace,
Donal
