Relativism is a philosophical concept that holds that truth, [[Morality]], or values are not absolute but are relative to the perspectives, cultures, or contexts from which they arise. It challenges the idea of universal principles that apply to all people at all times. Instead, relativism suggests that what is true, right, or meaningful depends on individual viewpoints or social frameworks. ## Tension between universalism and relativism in Aldous Huxley’s _[[Brave New World]]_ and George Orwell’s _[[1984]]_ The tension between universalism and relativism plays out distinctly in [[Aldous Huxley]]’s _Brave New World_ and George Orwell’s _1984_. Each novel offers a dystopian vision of a controlled society, but their methods of control and ideological underpinnings differ in ways that align them more closely with either universalism or relativism. ##### **Universalism and Relativism: Definitions** • **[[Universalism]]** `Concepts:` `Knowledge Base:` asserts that certain truths, values, or principles are universally applicable to all people, regardless of context. It often underpins ideologies that impose a singular vision of morality or progress. • **Relativism** posits that values and truths are context-dependent, varying across cultures, societies, and historical periods. It often resists imposing one “correct” framework on diverse ways of life. ### **Brave New World (Relativism)** _Brave New World_ depicts a society based on _utilitarian relativism_, where values and norms are tailored to ensure stability and happiness. While the World State imposes a rigid order, the underpinning logic is relativistic: 1. **Cultural Engineering** The World State embraces cultural relativism by conditioning citizens to accept their roles in a stratified caste system. For example: • Happiness is not defined universally but engineered according to one’s caste. An Alpha and an Epsilon are both conditioned to find satisfaction within their predetermined roles. • Truth is irrelevant compared to utility—what matters is maintaining order, not adhering to some absolute moral or epistemic framework. 2. **Malleable [[Morality]]** Concepts like [[Knowledge/Love]], [[Family]], and individuality are rendered meaningless within the World State because they are seen as destabilising forces. Instead, [[Morality]] is constructed to align with societal needs: • Promiscuity is virtuous, while [[Monogamy]] is deviant. • Emotional suffering is abolished, even at the cost of human complexity and depth. 3. **Critique of Relativism** While relativism underpins the World State’s logic, Huxley critiques this by showing the spiritual emptiness and dehumanisation it causes. John the Savage’s rejection of this relativistic system highlights the need for universal human values such as freedom, love, and suffering. **1984 (Universalism)** In contrast, _1984_ presents a dystopia rooted in _totalitarian universalism_. The Party imposes a singular, absolute truth and moral framework that admits no deviation: 1. **Imposition of Universal Truth** The Party asserts total control over reality, epitomised by the slogan “2 + 2 = 5.” Universalism manifests in the insistence that there is only one truth—defined by the Party—and any alternative is punishable as thoughtcrime. • This universalism extends to language through Newspeak, which eradicates the possibility of dissent by reducing the range of thought. 2. **Ideological [[Absolutism]]** The Party’s [[Ideology]] is a rigid, unchanging system that demands total obedience. Concepts like love, individuality, and morality are obliterated, replaced by loyalty to the Party: • Even the inner life is subject to the Party’s universalism, as shown in Winston’s ultimate submission: loving Big Brother. 3. **Critique of Universalism** Orwell critiques this absolute universalism by illustrating its brutal consequences: the erasure of human freedom, individuality, and truth. The Party’s universal truth is a tool of oppression, obliterating any possibility of relativistic or alternative perspectives. **Comparison of Alignment** 1. **Universalism:** **_1984_** Orwell’s world aligns with universalism because it enforces a single, absolute framework for understanding reality and morality. The Party’s domination of thought, language, and even memory is an extreme example of how universalism can be weaponised to annihilate diversity and dissent. 2. **Relativism:** **_Brave New World_** Huxley’s society aligns with relativism because it reshapes values and norms to suit the utilitarian goals of stability and happiness. Rather than imposing a singular moral or epistemic framework, the World State adjusts morality to ensure compliance and contentment within its artificial structures. **Conclusion** The two novels represent dystopian critiques of these opposing frameworks: • _1984_ shows the dangers of universalism when taken to extremes, leading to totalitarian rigidity and dehumanisation. • _Brave New World_ critiques a relativistic worldview that sacrifices universal human values for the sake of engineered happiness and stability. Both suggest that an ethical balance is needed, avoiding the absolutism of universalism while resisting the moral emptiness of relativism. #### Postmodernism Complements Activism, Rather Than Undermining It • Chomsky’s View: He accuses postmodernism of being an academic exercise disconnected from real-world activism. • Counterpoint: Postmodernism does not necessarily preclude [[Activism]]; instead, it reshapes [[Activism]] to be more adaptable and aware of context. For example, feminist and decolonial movements have used postmodern critiques to deconstruct oppressive narratives and build coalitions based on shared but pluralistic goals. Far from paralysing action, postmodernism offers tools to resist oppressive systems in nuanced and flexible ways. Postmodernism and Chomsky’s rationalism are not mutually exclusive; they address different aspects of social critique. While Chomsky focuses on structural and material injustices, postmodernism examines cultural and discursive dimensions of power. Together, they offer a more holistic critique of oppression, addressing both its material and symbolic dimensions. `Concepts:` `Knowledge Base:`