The Natural Linguist

 Relativism is reviled as an abrogation of a reliable standard against which to measure "goodness" or "badness". I agree that without a standard, we gradually lose all that is distinct, and devolve into an undifferentiated mush that is powerless to prevent the encroachment of the law of the jungle because it cannot bring itself to condemn evil on the off chance that it may actually be "good". I will say that I dislike and avoid the terms "good" and "bad". But my dislike of those terms is not an acquiescence to rank relativism or malignant multiculturalism. I have no wish to abolish a standard of excellence. I dislike those words because they inhibit digging deeper. They stop thought. They curtail inquiry. They are the parenting equivalent of "because I said so." The questions we often fail to ask are ones like this: Good for whom? Bad in what way? Is this a short-term good at the expense of a long-term bad? Is a "necessar