I agree with some of B’s ideas. But the concept that Absolute Truth is basically a myth takes things too far, at least in my opinion.

If absolute truth is non-existent, then the logical conclusion (albeit a lengthy one that I’m not going to post here in its entirety) is that humans define everything for themselves. What is right for you may be entirely different than what is right for me.

(Note: the following is a purely hypothetical dramatization. Don’t expect this to actually happen. I’m using it as an analogy for a purpose.)

So to see if absolute truth really exists, I’m going to pull out my virtual gun and shoot you. Bang. You’re dead. End of story. Who cares if you don’t like it? Shooting you was right for me.

So how do you react? “That’s not FAIR! What a stupid ploy! Shooting me hardly solves the problem!” Ah, yes. Not fair by whose standards? Something being fair implies rules, justice and order. Those seem to be absolutes.

However, I’m glad that B admits that he/she may be wrong.
And I’m going to admit the same thing. I’m just as likely as you (if not more likely) to be wrong, and this analogy is going to be lambasted by the masses. But that’s the purpose of this: to think.

I hope my post makes you think.
And I really don’t believe in shooting people who disagree with you, for the record.