e bedrock of such misbehavior and ignorance resulting from such scenarios that people deny the absolute distinctions existing between truth and falsities. That is the reason, discussion examining the differences between what is true and what is wrong has almost always been a hot topic among sociologists and psychologists, who strive to find out the facts with the help of astute researches regarding whether there is any truth in the claim that “there are no absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false.” In my opinion, this statement or claim is unequivocally false and unjustified and I believe this because were it not for the clear distinction between truths and falsities, this world would have experienced long ago a horrible mess and pandemonium in no time at all. It is only because some people clearly see and realize the differences between the correct and incorrect actions that there is some peace left in this world.
Agreeing on the doubtless boundary line marked between right and wrong is a factual and reality-based concept. “Absolutism” and “relativism” are two famous ethical approaches that are highly worth mentioning when discussing this claim that are the truths and falsities two entirely separate domains or not. Absolutism lays stress on the existence and applicability of moral or ethical standards and suggests that right is right and wrong is wrong and there is a clear difference between the good and bad actions. Believers of absolutism have a clear vision for identifying the morally justified deeds and know how to distinguish them from unethical and socially offensive actions. Respecting and abiding by the established moral laws is very important according to absolutism for preserving the traditional or conventional values, which reflect the obvious difference between just and unjust things. If the theory of absolutism is scrutinized, this much becomes clear that its whole philosophy strives to fulfill the obligation of