Truth and Relativism

     There are many dichotomies in the world by which human affairs are analyzed --- conservatism and liberalism, bourgeoisie and proletariat, male and female, arrogant and humble, employed and retired and on an on.   Analysts love dichotomies, opposites, trying to fit reality into either this or that of two opposite categories.  Sometimes that mode of analysis may have merit and sometimes not, but I submit that the broad dichotomy which over-arches the others is objecitivsm and relativism.  For example, I consider Islamic Jihadism to be evil, evil in fact, not because I don't like it and someone else does, not because it's evil to me but not to someone else.  No, evil period.  If a movement which endorses bombing trains, planes, theatres, restaurants, markets, busses, office buildings, and even churches, thereby murdering countless innocent men, women and children is not evil, what is?   Can  death for non-believers or the oppression of women be anything but evil?  Can the benign and beautiful admonitions of Jesus Christ be anything but good?  Do we mean simply that something is good 'in the eye of the beholder' or simply good?
     If we believe in objective truth we ought to able to locate the authority from which it proceeds.  In Judeo-Christianity that is the God of Abraham and Christ.  Whatever it is, if there is nothing outside the observer from which he draws authority, how can good be good and evil, evil, rather than good or evil only in someone's opinion?  And if all truth really isn't truth, but a matter of opinion, how is it possible to argue about anything?  If you say that one thing is as good as another you have simply expressed an opinion, not a fact.  It is true that if I say that I love Paris I am, speaking literally, stating a fact about my state of mind.  But it should be understood as an opinion.  It tells you nothing about Paris but only something about myself.
      If I say that Paris is a beautiful city I am stating a fact.  I am telling you something about Paris, that it is a beautiful city --- beautiful whether I like the city or not.  And also, that kind of statement is subject to argument.  You can't argue about my state of mind unless you are a mind reader or have evidence that my state of mind is not what I say it is.
      But once you remove some standard by which statements of fact are either trure or false, everything becomes merely a matter of opinion, only, not fact.  Even the statement "there are no facts" is a statement of fact.
     If you say "Albany is the capitol of Mississippi" you are wrong, but you have still made a statement of fact.  The fact that an assertion is a statement of fact does not mean that it is true, but only that it is a certain kind of statement.