I can't help feel people are defining relativism wrong. Or to say, people are using it on incorrect terms, thus losing the functionality of the word for proper debate. As is, defining it as a philosophical theory, and not a simple word creates a quagmire that destroys meaning and allows for dishonest players. Things are relative, this is true. Yet add 'ism to the end, implying theory, and suddenly being relevant no longer actually has meaning.

This debases the term relevant, changing it from a sliding scale, to a scale without a base. It becomes an excuse to simply change the rules infinity. In short, there is no point debating relativism as is, as that it's just a set of rules that break pre-existing self evident rules. It's deception, pure and true, with the only purpose being of changing the facts to match the desired outcome.

Sorry, I guess I never realized how loosely philosophy defines this term, or more acuratly how liberally people have abused it. Up until now, I've only seen the word as being an extension of relevance, and not just a tool to say or do anything that one pleases.