faceoff.jpgThis might be altogether too vague to make any sense.

Relativity seems to be all the rage at the moment. Everything is all about ‘reading things in context’ and ‘understanding the victim.’ And while zero-​tolerance and rigidity are often very bad things, too much relativity is just as boring. I’m tired of hedging, hearing about factors and reasons that mitigate a strong stand on anything. I’m not talking specifically about politics, so don’t think that I am. I’m talking about discourse in general. Few people seem willing to stick to their guns on a position, and if they do find a position to stick to, all too often it is a position filled with mitigation. ‘I believe in this, only as long as this and this occur and I might change my view if this happens.’

I’m as guilty of this as the next person, but thankfully I realize that finding excuses by comparing a situation to possible other situations or comparing it to the intent of folks does not qualify as a mitigating factor. I’m wondering if sympathy and empathy have been confused with justice. Or maybe that is far too grand an idea. Maybe I should wonder if this type of relativity results in an inability to come to a distinct and firm conclusion because too much time is spent in an endless comparison loop.

Maybe its a desire to not take responsibility for the consequences of a decision. I hope I never fail to do this. I guess what I want to aim for is an ability to recognize and weigh things based on relative comparisons, to understand the motives and feelings and consequences of whatever is involved, the consequences of any decision I can make and the wisdom and integrity to choose what I feel as the best decision, have concise, definite explanations for my reasoning and the determination to stick to my decision once it has been made.