One of the greatest problems in evangelising is knowing when to stop the metaphysical and epistemological arguments and go for the jugular.
I use the Socratic Method. I ask the non-believer what they do believe. They want to always tell me what they do not believe, but all non-believers believe in something.
It is rather easy to start a conversation using popular culture.
Example: the Sherlock series is very popular. The acting is above average and although there are some irritating photographic techniques, and the music is horrid, the interpretations of the stories have dramatic value. Some of the story-lines are based on the originals, but deviate quickly, which is fine.
The college bunch like Sherlock. So, my question to a bunch of relativists would be, "Why do you believe that murder is wrong and horrible, and even perhaps betraying your country is wrong?"
"If you do not believe that spying and betrayal are wrong, why do you watch the show?"
"Are Chinese gangs evil, as portrayed? Why do you think violence is wrong or right depending on who is being violent or receiving violence?"
Make the relativist begin to think that maybe there is a natural law.
Secondly, if they back off, it is because they are lazy thinkers. Help them along.
"Why do you like Sherlock?" OK, he is cool, (You can tell he is not an INTJ by the way as he needs to get a reaction.) and smart and always right, mostly. But, ask the relativist why it is important for Sherlock to be correct in his thinking. Another question could be "Why do you think Sherlock is a good guy and Moriarity is a bad guy?" Because one is psychotic...?
As I wrote in an earlier post in the past few days, too many people think that success means goodness. Hmmm.
The writers of Sherlock are a bit confused on the moral issues themselves, but that is another issue.
It is full of relativistic nonsense as one could see in the first series in 2010. Being gay is OK, as is fornication and nudity and sadism...well, almost.
The simple truth is that the relativist young person makes decisions daily on likes and dislikes based on moral principles which most young people do not realize they make.
Relativism is a moral stand.
Individualism is a moral stand.
So, even those who think they do not have opinions and do not want to foist them onto anyone else, do.
So, is it OK if a S/M flirts with the virginal Sherlock and he almost succumbs? Or, is it OK that he lies to get to get a reaction? And, he needs to impress. Too bad-that is his weakness.
And don't tell me it is not a series of stories about murder mysteries and merely a "thriller". That is the Millennialist cop-out.
Natural law is always there, hidden or not...we just need to help these young ones pull it out of the dark cave of indifference, anti-intellectualism and sloth.
The real reason why people fall away from the Church, and youth raised in Ireland, who are call themselves atheists fall into that category, is usually not for rational reasons. Most likely, the person has decided to live with his girlfriend or be gay, or think that cheating on exams is fine. The intellectual arguments of a real intellectually convinced atheist are rare.
By the way, Sherlock thinks both logically and analogically. His going into his mind-palace is analogical thinking as the logical thinking has failed to solve the problem. When I taught logic, I discovered that most girls in America thought analogically and most guys, logically. However, (I first taught college in 1979 and stopped in 2010 with a hiatus as a stay-at-home-mom in between there somewhere) that changed over the years. More and more men were thinking analogically. Sad. That is the creativity which depends on memory and associations of an excellent observer. Enough said....
DISCLAIMER: I am writing about secular humanists and not Catholics. The Catholic trad youth are logical and more so, as they are more traditional.