A belief is said to be in the absolute when it is complete and independent; uncompromising and lacking reservation for any other belief save itself. This belief in the absolute varies according to individual temperaments, belief in fact or principle; ideologies and outlook to things. In our every day world we find people acclaiming the existence or non- existence of certain abstract things which they express in the absolute. Such absolute ideas abound like that on reality, fate or predestination, truth, beauty, love and even the believe in an absolute God. However in all this we find ideas contrasting due to difference in opinion or even experience. A great many even tend to answer the question with philosophical rationalistic ideas whereas another few look at it pragmatically. The difference that exists between the two later groups is that while the pragmatists do not entirely deny the existence of absolute edition of ideas they neither believe in its existence. They accuse the rationalist of taking concretely the absolute edition of things. The rationalists on the other hand accuse the pragmatist of sitting on the fence and being cowardly in taking a firm position in the argument. However the belief in the absolute is not what one should treat the way he or she wants. It entails much. Consequently, it would be wiser for one to keep mute if you are not sure of your facts or ready to back it up with convincing arguments. This is because we encounter it everyday of our life. Our position to a great extent determines how the boat of our life sails. No matter how we try, it dogs our footsteps till we take our stand end stick to it. The subsequent discussion. I hope will prove the veracity of the above allusions.

Let us first consider the belief in absolute reality, since people believe in the existence of one and only reality. That is the independence of reality. This is just the rationalist idea of reality. But for pragmatist, reality is still in the making. Schiller calls reality as a mere unresisting ’vλn’ which is to be made over to us. For James Williams we may glimpse at it but never grasp it; what we tend to call the absolute reality for him is just a substitute or faked version of it. This is the pragmatist idea of absolute reality. One can’t help saying that this belief is a matter of choice. This is because in whichever one we tend to believe it reflects adversely on our previous beliefs.
Having reached a stalemate on absolute reality let us consider what people do think about the absoluteness of our destiny. If we assume that everything we do is pre- ordained like the fatalist who believes, that man can do nothing to alter his destiny. Are we ready to accept the fact that the world is a stage with us as actors: are we to believe that we have a foolish God or a puppet master who made the world to watch its inhabitants as characters in a play ? If we are to say no to all this and side with the freewillist who believe that man is absolutely the author of his own destiny- this again leaves us with the question of the veracity of Gods claims as the creator and controller of the universe. Even more disturbing is the doubt it places on the authenticity of the Bible where God stated that without him man can do nothing. The test on John 17: 12 where God again ascertains that all giving to him were safe except the one destined to be lost. All this questions are very unsettling.

Let us consider the absoluteness of truth. For pragmatist like Dewey and Schiller, truth is defined as that which works or gives satisfaction respectively. James Williams states that the “true” is the name of whatever proves itself to be good in the way of belief and good too for definite assignable reasons”. If we are to side with these disciples of multiplicity of truth, who believes in anything being the truth for an individual if he or she wants it. So, that leaves is with many unpalatable questions to answer if a society should operate with such notion of truth one needs not guess much the type of morality that will prevail in it. If what anyone believes counts as true then who would ever acknowledge being in the wrong? Again if we are to believe in the absoluteness of truth how are we to get the standards? This is back to the pragmatist who believes in the notion of new truth being true, if it tolerates and builds itself an previous truth. More so, it is quite evident that our ideas of wrong or right is greatly influenced by how it affects us and in giving such laws self is the first to be considered; our ability to scale through such laws counts in its structure. Are we then for multiple or an absolute truth?
In society today, we see people talking about absolute beauty as if it is realizable quite easily in this terrestrial realm. Well, for the absolute adherents, there is no such thing as absolute beauty; leave for them what the absolutist calls a perfect beauty, they are sure to find one or two defects that stripes that beauty of its absolute standard. Are we to say it is matter of opinion again? It leads us back to where we started. Even at that, the finite nature of man leaves him no right to state any thing as absolute. This is because abstracts such as beauty emanates everyday and lives longer than man himself.

Another abstract that has the quality of absolute attached to it is love. There are claims of people having absolute love for one another but it seems we have much of it from fictional books or dramas. In these books, the authors try to create a world of there own, giving absolute qualities that are far from realizable to characters. But the adherents of the absolute say there is no such love in existence. However, for the pragmatist, the notion of an absolute love stinks. For them, there is no such thing as love let alone having an absolute one. For them, love is a sentiment precipitated by illusionary excitement that fades away leaving the victim in utter hopelessness and frustrations. Is it not foolish to attach the absolute to such a thing? It seems the divine is the only thing that qualifies for the absolute quality. Let us see if it gives us a satisfactory answer.

Lastly let us consider the belief in an absolute God. Our previous discussions have been centered on the rationalistic and empiricist (pragmatic) notion of the absolute. Their notions have been variant in that, while the rationalist claims of the existence of the absolute, the empiricist does not agree totally in its existence. However on the issue of absolute God our world seems to be divided more broadly into the theist, polytheist and the atheists. It will be a waste of time to go into details of the state of belief people has about God. As I said earlier on, it will also lead us back to our previous discussions. on our believes, truth or realities being a matter of opinion and want. But if we are true to ourselves and follow the directives of our conscience, that assertion can’t be true. Any thing can’t be held as true but on the other hand we can’t deny the existence of human or self-element being in our beliefs about our conception of truth, reality or any other abstract.

The world never just existed, something had to trigger off the chain reaction that took place and is still taking place unlike other earthly chain reactions which stops at relatively short periods. I can’t deny the existence of a super-natural (call it super human if you like) influence in our lives. Something affects every human being in a way that if it were in our power we would put it to a stop. That thing, that being or spirit is God and demands absolute respect and every absolute quality. As I said on absolute beauty, the finite nature of man gives him no chance to identify with any absolute quality except on the intervention of the divine.

Conclusively, the use of the absolutes becomes null and void when used to describe human related issues. But since God transcends every absolute, the absolute becomes applicable to humans at his wish.