To what extent does relativism reliable for an authority to produce a knowledge claim?

Does relativism play a role in influencing judgement?

Political correctness

Ethnocentrism

Racism

Multiculturalism

What is Influencing Judgement:

Who is the audience: Citizens Society
Who is the claimant: Fraser Anning, Australian Senator
How relativism influence judgement:
Role? What role? Definition of role?
Why use relativism to influence judgement of claimant and audience?
Does this prove relativism reliable? And Why?

Claim:

sway public opinion

Relativism reliable because it can influence judgement.
Ethnocentrism.

Due to the nature of relativism yang ..(definition)

people basically read what they want to hear and gloss over things they don’t want to
hear.They wanted to hear of the aim of peace which is to be free from disturbance and
achieve freedom; tranquillity. and neglected anything that goes against it. Or in this case,
muslim fanatics roaming in the streets of new Zealand.

The problem is that in politics, people get much attached to the idea of hope. They hope for
a vision which may or may not be realistic, and may or may not be grounded in truth and
facts. (counter claim)

But it has become easier to do this, and the insidious power of things like Facebook and
Twitter exaggerates it.

When his followers resulted in the idea that muslims are the real cause of blohshed.... FA, as an
authority can persuade his followers to strengthen his claim on muslim immigration issue. By gaining
trust and uniting the society against anything that goes against achieving the idea of hope in society.

You undermine trust in the judiciary. You may be a murderer and a rapist, but you claim it’s
the system that’s against you. This is sort of Trump’s best move: It’s the thing he
understands most
It’s a bit like conspiracy theorists, who actually thrive on the fact that all the evidence points
against their theory, because that just shows that the establishment is clever enough to
conceal what’s really going on. People get attached to certain ideas and nothing will shake
them. And when convictions start to live in opposition to reason or truth, that’s a very
dangerous thing.

The GfdS adds:

Ever greater sections of the population are ready to ignore facts, and even to accept
obvious lies willingly. Not the claim to truth, but the expression of the ‘felt truth’ leads
to success in the ‘post-factual age’

Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s well-known observation that “Everyone is entitled to his own
opinion, but not to his own facts” is more timely than ever: polarisation has grown so
extreme

they defined post-truth as “denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less
influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.”

Ideology, in other words, takes precedence over reality.

ideology to trump reality, it’s more like propaganda, and it puts us on the road to fascism.

As Yale philosopher Jason Stanley argues, “The key thing is that fascist politics is about
identifying enemies, appealing to the in-group (usually the majority group), and smashing
truth and replacing it with power.”

domination. In my analysis, post-truth is an assertion of power.

Trump lies he does so not to get someone to accept what he’s saying as true, but to show that
he is powerful enough to say it.

electoral dictatorships” – where a society retains the facade of voting without the institutions
or trust to ensure that it is an actual democracy, like those in Putin’s Russia or Erdogan’s
Turkey .you do not need to convince someone that you are telling the truth when you can
simply assert your will over them and dominate their reality.

Counter claim:
absolutism
Morality is absolute
Strive for morality but in the end kita accept multiple ideologies.
Therfore society may not progress.
Humanity is in danger.
Perspective. Racism

Cultural relativism creates a society that is fueled through personal bias.

People grow up in specific environments where different truths are taught. Some families are
incredibly inclusive, while others focus on racial bias. Cultural relativism encourages individuals to
form alliances with those who have similar perspectives instead of sharing different outcomes.
Community segregation occurs frequently because of the discomfort levels which occur when
different definitions are present. People will always follow their own moral codes and ethics at the
expense of others in a society with the structure.
1. How is relativism reliable as of in playing a role to influence the judgement? I will extract
and define the keywords in the subkq.
2. I’ll be touching on both sides of the story in the aspects of the judgement of the audience
and also of the claimant (Fraser Anning) himself.
3. Role - the function assumed or apart played by an individual or a group of people in
facing a particular situation.
4. Relativism – as stated earlier, it is a position whereby true or false moral judgements are
relative to individual standards.
5. The event of the claim studied is regarding the issue of post truth politics – denoting
circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than
appeals to emotion and personal belief .Are also political cultures in which arguments
and debates are formed by appealing emotions rather than details of policy. Whereby, it
ignores factual debates as truth and rely them as of a secondary importance.

6. The audience have their own perception of a certain absolute truth or in this is the aspect
of peace. They wanted to hear of the aim of peace which is to be free from disturbance
and achieve freedom; tranquillity and neglect anything that goes against it.
7. The claimant, in this case comes in, and agrees to the absolute truth but uses other
relative truth (ways of morality) as means and manners to achieve the idea of peace in
the first place.
8. The claimant establishes an ideology based on his own past experience encountering the
Muslim community. Ideology, in other words, takes precedence over the bound to be
reality.
9. The claimant would use his emotions in constructing claim thus proving the existence of
post truth politics.
10. But, due to the fact that Australia has no act of protectionism against the idea of free
speech, quoted from The Australian Constitution whereby it does not explicitly protect
freedom of expression, therefore his pragmatic idea has been allowed and accepted to be
radiated towards the audience or in this case, the citizens of Australia.
11. Due to being in the side of far right politics, he’s been alleged against the views of anti-
immigration ideas and Muslim. Far right politics – have an extreme for nationalism and
have greater tendencies for authoritarian approaches. While far- left supporters agrees
with social equality in opposition to social hierarchies. These terms are denoted on the
political spectrum.
12. The audience, as of being entitled in hopes for a vision which may or may not be realistic,
and may or may not be grounded in truth and facts, will tend to believe in anything that
goes in line with those particular hopes and idealisations. People basically read what they
want to hear and gloss over things they don’t want to hear which goes align with the
idealisation.
13. The GfdS added: “Ever greater sections of the population are ready to ignore facts, and
even to accept obvious lies willingly. Not the claim to truth, but the expression of the ‘felt
truth’ leads to success in the ‘post-factual age’”
14. But it has become easier to do this, and the insidious power of things like Facebook and
Twitter exaggerates it.
15. Based on the statements led by Fraser Anning, as an authority, in order to obtain true
peace, the audience may come to a deductive reasoning, in forms of syllogisms, whereby,
in premise 1;”real cause of bloodshed in New Zealand streets today is the immigration
program.” and in premise 2; allows Muslim Fanatics to migrate to New Zealand”
therefore, in premise 3, the audience will come to a conclusion that Muslims were the
cause of the bloodshed.
16. To reason of, they’ll deem anything against their idealisation, or in this case, the Muslims,
as frauds and will extinguish the customs itself. This thus unites due to having sufficient
trust and respect as of towards achieving and aim of the absolute peace.
17. Proves so that post-truth is an assertion of power and domination of the authority, the
idea of it evolves around the authority himself. Thus, swaying the publics’opinion.
18. This enhances the idealistic view that is sovereignty isn’t against international peace but
equal to it. Sovereignty is defined as the power or authority to rule. Therefore, in this
case, we can assume that the definition of peace in the minds of the audience is up to the
sovereign itself.

Limitations

1. Modern generations would be fuelled with personal bias, due to how humanity operates.
People would tend to be with others who have similar thoughts and understanding.
2. Community segregation would thereby occur, leading to the sharing of specific
perspectives and arise of power to determine their own moral code based on personal
and confirmation bias. Leading to the act of racism against anti-Muslims and
Islamophobes.
3. Impacts in chaos and society may as well not progress in the future.
Counter Claim

4. The idea of morality itself is absolute. Peace is always leaning towards an absolute truth.
5. Morality underlies in the ethical belief whereby that in achieving something, there are
absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and those certain
actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act itself. (RLS)
6. The audience would re-enact and act as in a moral compass/value judgement due to the
absolute idea of morality, and not follow certain herd behaviours to the present tyranny
of the majority and live out the rights for the minorities. Conformation bias.

Tanya teacher