from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. A political theory holding that all power should be vested in one ruler or other authority.
- n. A form of government in which all power is vested in a single ruler or other authority.
- n. An absolute doctrine, principle, or standard.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. Positiveness; the state of being absolute.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. The state of being absolute; the system or doctrine of the absolute; the principles or practice of absolute or arbitrary government; despotism.
- n. Doctrine of absolute decrees.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. The state of being absolute.
- n. The principle of absolute individual power in government; belief in the unrestricted right of determination or disposal in a sovereign.
- n. The theological doctrine of predestination or absolute decrees.
- n. The metaphysical doctrines of the absolutists.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. the doctrine of an absolute being
- n. a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
- n. dominance through threat of punishment and violence
- n. the principle of complete and unrestricted power in government
What seems to be forgotten in such absolutism is what is lost in that pursuit.
I suspect that the federal courts absolutism is a response to the conservative tribunal absolutism.
This, not biblical absolutism, is ancient and traditional Christianity.
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).
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.