A Valued Conversation.

I was looking back through some old work to see if I could incorporate anything from past assignments for one of my current classes. I came across an e-mail conversation I had with my honors teacher. The topic concerns relativism vs absolutism. I value this conversation not just for the praise my teacher offers (encouragment is important to him, even when occansionally it might be "forced"). The main reason I value this conversation is because I felt like I made a difference. Maybe it's not immediate change, I'm glad it's not immediate (no revolutions here, just reformations-- thank you very much). And most importantly, I stood up for my beliefs without harming my relationships with my teacher and the class. I stood up for my beliefs to the best of my meager abilities. I stood up for my beliefs and may have planted some seeds. It was interesting, as was the class. Below, I've changed the names (although it was totally unnecessary to do so) and my e-mails are in red while my teacher's are in blue. So here it is:


Jane (my project parnter) told me she sent you her exploratory essay...I just wanted to see if you had any advice for me as I get farther into the first draft. It's going to be harder for me to take this paper seriously because I don't really believe in it; but I guess creating a viable argument for something that I could easily argue against is part of rhetoric. Thanks for any help you may have to offer!!
Kala

I didn’t make time to look at it. I was actually waiting for revised drafts so that I could see what you were considering a more-or-less finished product. But it surprises me that you don’t see some value in what you are arguing. It seems to me you’ve had that experience this semester. I suspect prior to all of the discussion of absolutism and relativism, you would have—if simply given a definition—considered yourself only an absolutist. I may be wrong, but I got the sense that you would have recoiled from the idea of relativism at all. And yet, within a framework of absolutism, perhaps absolutism slightly redefined for yourself, you have come to see that you have bits of both. Weren’t you operating from an understanding that has grown and gained dimension, that has become more complete and more rich? Isn’t it possible that this understanding will grow still further, that your partial understanding now—which guides your life—will be transformed again and again? Isn’t this part of your argument, that partial truths don’t have to be monsters, that they can be foundations we consider positive, and they too are imperfect, that they too grow and change?
Joe

Thank you! I loved your words in the email you sent me. It all sounds beautiful! But...
In response: Yes, I do now have a more whole understanding of what it is that I actually believe; but I feel I am just as repulsed by and clear-minded about relativism as before. I still believe in antithesis and always will; but I also believe in balance and always have. I think the biggest change in my views is more on the side of understanding where they come from and how they ought to be presented--presented not with pragmatism or pacifism, rather with a hearty helping of reality (or as much of reality as I can get my hands on). I see value in my argument, but only as the means to further understanding the other side of the debate. If I can convincingly argue for something in which I do not believe, I think I will have a better handle on this thing called truth. I was initially wondering (perhaps worrying) that at some point of convincing, I'd start convincing myself. But the further I get into the research, the more I feel that my beliefs are in the right. You are likely to be right in saying that I would have previously considered myself an absolutist, yet only one in theory. Now I can only consider myself a truth-searcher, a truth-fighter, and--until someone convinces me otherwise-- a truth-obtainer. I agree that my understanding of things will forever be transforming; yet I doubt (I resist saying "I know" for the sake of being "open") that it will ever depart from my current foundation of beliefs. And in the end, for this presentation I will be arguing that almost truths don't have to be monsters. Yet I feel that almost truths are monsters, and just because they are accepted does not make them okay. In fact, if our world was in a position capable of facing truth and recognizing all monsters; well it just might be a good thing. Sure almost truths can be beneficial, but imagine if we had no need of them at all...that's what I wish we could all aspire toward. I do not believe it too idealistic a dream. Perhaps it is. But that just makes it all the more worth fighting for.
Thank you again for that email! I truly appreciate that you care and that you understand this is the stuff that matters most.
Kala

I have truly enjoyed our emails throughout the semester, and I am already missing these exchanges in advance for next semester. You are an incredibly thoughtful student, and you make it easy to enjoy teaching. Thanks for all the gifts you’ve given to the class and to me.
Joe