• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Moral relativism.

Moral relativism?

  • Yea.

    Votes: 24 64.9%
  • Nay.

    Votes: 13 35.1%

  • Total voters
    37

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Moral relativism gets a bad rep, but let's take a look on what it actually means:

In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances.


Now this stance is perfectly logical and reflects the reality of morals and ethics, because morals are in fact relative to social, cultural, historical and personal circumstances.

Unless you believe in God given morals and ethical standards, I don't see a strong argument in favor of the natural rights theory. Some proponents of the theory state that human nature is proof of the existence of these rights, and they seem to confuse what they think ought to be with what actually exists. This is known as the Is-ought problem.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Yeah, anything with "relativism" in its title gets a bad rep. I tend to agree with the idea, though, even if I haven't explored it in great depth. It seems intuitively true to me.
 

Anonymous

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
605
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Objectively it's relative, but realistically, we are a species with certain biological limitations and patterns of behavior, and as such, there are going to be universal codes which are beneficial when followed, such as the incest taboo and laws against murder. But I still voted relativism.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Yeah, anything with "relativism" in its title gets a bad rep. I tend to agree with the idea, though, even if I haven't explored it in great depth. It seems intuitively true to me.

Yeah, I think when people hear the term, they tend to think the moral relativist is someone who has no morals, just because they think they're relative.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Yeah, I think when people hear the term, they tend to think the moral relativist someone has no morals, just because they think they're relative.

Yes, and similarly when someone declares religious agnosticism.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Objectively it's relative, but realistically, we are a species with certain biological limitations and patterns of behavior, and as such, there are going to be universal codes which are beneficial when followed, such as the incest taboo and laws against murder. But I still voted relativism.

And patterns and trends are just that... patterns and trends.

Sure there are some nice codes that would do society good to live by.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Moral relativism gets a bad rep, but let's take a look on what it actually means:

In philosophy moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances.


Now this stance is perfectly logical and reflects the reality of morals and ethics, because morals are in fact relative to social, cultural, historical and personal circumstances.

Unless you believe in God given morals and ethical standards, I don't see a strong argument in favor of the natural rights theory. Some proponents of the theory state that human nature is proof of the existence of these rights, and they seem to confuse what they think ought to be with what actually exists. This is known as the Is-ought problem.

How does belief in God render an argument in favor of moral absolutism tenable?
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
How does belief in God render an argument in favor of moral absolutism tenable?

Because we can't disprove the existence of their God, and their theory of moral absolutism resides within their theory of the existence of God.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
Every moral is reletive, but are there any underlyning moral constants that should be universally recognized in a non cult manner?
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Every moral is reletive, but are there any underlyning moral constants that should be universally recognized in a non cult manner?

I think, as someone mentioned, the only code of behavior that's universally taboo-ed is mother-son incest. Learned that in cultural anthropology!

Otherwise, I think what counts as "moral" changes drastically with time and culture.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Every moral is reletive, but are there any underlyning moral constants that should be universally recognized in a non cult manner?

There are some common morals people have (no murder, no rape...etc) that I think should be adopted by law and society.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Well, I think that rejecting any "moral" because we realize that it's historically and culturally situated is a mistake. Just because it's not "timeless" is no reason to suppose that it's not useful for our purposes now.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
really? That is the only moral that is universally recognized? .....Hamlet? No I didnt really pay attention.


Oddly enough I remember when watching the preverbial film on primates. One mother would kill the children of other chimps to eat them with her children. She was described as cold, and off, since day one. Her children stopped killing when she died. Not instinct not moral? Are there other universal morals?
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
theory of moral absolutism resides within their theory of the existence of God.

Okay, lets pretend God exists, how does this show for moral absolutism to be true?

Because we can't disprove the existence of their God, .

We cannot disprove the existence of dragons either, does this mean we can use dragons as a reason to justify zoological theories?
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
took me too long to write that I should have quoted.

What I am saying is that one of the things I realized in that film is that there are codes of conduct even in the less advanced and that in some way it is a matter, not of culture, but of instinct.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Well, I think that rejecting any "moral" because we realize that it's historically and culturally situated is a mistake. Just because it's not "timeless" is no reason to suppose that it's not useful for our purposes now.

Definitely, I just have a hard time accepting the authority of any moral or norm just because of it's prevalence in the past.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
Okay, lets pretend God exists, how does this show for moral absolutism to be true?

Depends on which God exists. A Christian God? Yes, moral absolutism would be true, because that's what the Christian God professes. A God that cares not for earthly affairs? No.

We cannot disprove the existence of dragons either, does this mean we can use dragons as a reason to justify zoological theories?

One can try. Proving and disproving are one thing. But plausibility is another, and can be applied to God and dragon existence debates.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Depends on which God exists. A Christian God? Yes, moral absolutism would be true, because that's what the Christian God professes. A God that cares not for earthly affairs? No..

How is moral absolutism true if the Christian God exists?



One can try. Proving and disproving are one thing. But plausibility is another, and can be applied to God and dragon existence debates.


Noone can show that it is plausible for dragons to exist, should we use the existence of dragons as the foundation for our ideas in zoology?

Or better yet morality? Should we make ethical decisions based on our belief that dragons exist?
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The only way I could see morality having an existence outside of the grounds you gave in the initial post, would be if their is some kind of cognitively innate form of morality. Whether such a thing does exist is highly debatable.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Definitely, I just have a hard time accepting the authority of any moral or norm just because of it's prevalence in the past.

Oh, certainly. But usually those types of arguments (for accepting a "moral" on the basis of tradition) try and sell the particular "moral" as being universal in the first place.
 
Top