from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
- noun A political theory holding that all power should be vested in one ruler or other authority.
- noun A form of government in which all power is vested in a single ruler or other authority.
- noun An absolute doctrine, principle, or standard.
from The Century Dictionary.
- noun The state of being absolute.
- noun The principle of absolute individual power in government; belief in the unrestricted right of determination or disposal in a sovereign.
- noun The theological doctrine of predestination or absolute decrees.
- noun The metaphysical doctrines of the absolutists.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English.
- noun The state of being absolute; the system or doctrine of the absolute; the principles or practice of absolute or arbitrary government; despotism.
- noun (Theol.) Doctrine of absolute decrees.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.
Positiveness; the state of being absolute.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- noun the doctrine of an absolute being
- noun a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
- noun dominance through threat of punishment and violence
- noun the principle of complete and unrestricted power in government
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
Similarly if it was vice-versa (though you might well be on firmer ground if you were arguing that the moral absolutism is itself ethically unsound).
I suspect that the federal courts absolutism is a response to the conservative tribunal absolutism.
This, not biblical absolutism, is ancient and traditional Christianity.
What seems to be forgotten in such absolutism is what is lost in that pursuit.
ALF regards the question, both ends and means, as absolute, and if Dawkins point about absolutism is correct, then his criticism crosses over to this domain as well.
When you get to the core of the argument, the question of relativism vs. absolutism is what the issue is about.
But I tend to think that absolutism is still valid, and even necessary, in light of that perspective,.
The thing is, being a fundamentalist about scriptural inerrancy or 'absolutism' - I've been reading Robin Gill isn't finally about our view of the Bible.
Poland’s failure to form a strong central authority versus Prussia’s hyper-absolutism is still the most probable explanation for the differing outcomes. lakefxdan Says:
I’m sure I’ve probably done this in the past, but I rather think absolutism is better accompanied by a pint and a wagging finger.