Relativism is Pissing Me Off (but I'm cooled down now)

[Dunecat]

Yes, moral relativism is pissing me off. I just got done talking with several people who literally had stuck their head's up their asses they were so full of themselves. I will try not to rant. ANYWAY

To say that there are no universal morality, or that we shouldn't recommend morality and judge others, is ********. Here's why:

If morality is always right for its respective culture, how can reform ever be brought about? Can there ever, in the definitive sense of the word, be reform? The only conclusion from this question is that relativism is silly because it is impractical and unreasonable to the history of cultures, philosophy, and religion.

What if there is a new issue to be addressed? A new moral law to be assigned to it? How can we argue hypothetical situations in the absence of specific cultural context? The conclusion is that relativism is silly because we can do those things outside of our own cultural context, especially since many (if not most) of us are part of several different "cultures", if there was even as definitive a thing as such.

*breathes*

*lights up*

...

*exhales*

[basics]

From the Christian perspective there is only one morality based on the first commandments. Now I hope that I am not going out of my depth here so I'll say that there is nothing that was created and is going to be created or discovered that is not already answered within the word of God, the Bible.

By that I mean the the nature of man doesn't change. We may know more, live better, but our natures are no different from that of those in earlier times. Indeed there isn't a thing about humans that is not already known. Where perhaps there can be problems is by changing morality or the laws on morality where fashion fits.

But because we change laws doesn't mean that they are right, and we do change laws, even bend laws to make things appear right but in the eyes of God and His commandments there is still that higher law that never changes simply because men don't change even though they change their own laws.

If reform means adjustment for the sake of making moral that which isn't it is not reforming anything rather bending morality to include that which lies outside law. This we see in Britain every other day and people are getting so sick of it because no longer do they know where they stand.

The end product governed by political correctness is to be one standard fits all regardless of that higher law placing morality in an ever decreasing level. Oh, we may be judgemental, but no longer openly, unless the long arm of the law reaches out in protest making you the guilty instead of perhaps the victim.

But in the end when the end does come there will be only one judge, no jury, no moral high-ground on which to protest because in the end we will all be judged by that higher law, the one from which we cannot hide.

[Thanatos]

If everybody has their own morality, there is no morality. I might as well go eat babies.

[Dunecat]

If everybody has their own morality, there is no morality. I might as well go eat babies.

Well that's not relativism though, is it? Wouldn't relativism say that you are wrong in doing so if it goes against your culture's taboo of baby-eating?

[Aetius]

Morality doesn't exist. Laws do.

[boofhead]

I agree completely with the OP. We have a choice: make up your mind and give something a go or just sit on the fence until you rot like a useless gown on a clothesline. If you are wrong, well shite, at least you lived your life. If you are right, then good on you for discernment personified.

And yet the moment a person steps out and chooses to be himself, if it doesn't fit with the accepted view, there are all kinds of voices calling like Sirens for a return to the middle path. The boring, middle path where you can never be wrong because you never state a concrete opinion in the first place.

I'd rather be dead than merely exist. I've only got one life, and I'm not here to waste it on fence-sitting.

[gaius valerius]

Moral/Cultural relativism is fine, but has its limits. The latter are rather individual IMO. I can accept for example muslim women wearing a scarf (nobody start discussing whether its a sign of opression or self-expression endless discussion - besides, no moslimas here right?), but when we're talking about for example chopping off little girls clitoris (you know clito-thingie forget term) then I say 'WHO ****' 'SICK'. My moral won't dig that.

[Dayman]

Morality is relative. However, society has its own morals and laws. If you violate those, depending on degree and whatnot, then their are penalties (incarceration, fines, being shunned, etc).

If everybody has their own morality, there is no morality. I might as well go eat babies.

If everyone has their own opinion, then their are no opinions.

Everyone does have their own moralities, but say if you go and eat babies, well lets say their mothers won't be happy and neither will the police. Or the community at large.

[Da Skinna]

The universal morality is that hurting other people for no particular reason is wrong. Helping others is good.

People who deny that are not at all forward thinking or conservative or freedom-loving or anything at all. They are not good if they think there is something relative in a way a person treats another.

Hit your wife, that's wrong. If you relativize it as she being your wife, that's still not right. Nor good.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

I have but one Morality.

Without God, there is only relative Morality, but I don't beleive in relative morality. Lucky me.

[Dayman]

I have but one Morality.

Without God, there is only relative Morality, but I don't beleive in relative morality. Lucky me.

But I have a different morality than you.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

Your morality is wrong. As mine is backed up by God.

But that's just my beleif.

So, who knows.

My morality all depends on God's existance, and yours depends on his nonexistance.

[Dayman]

Your morality is wrong. As mine is backed up by God.

But that's just my beleif.

So, who knows.

My morality is just different from yours.

My morality all depends on God's existance, and yours depends on his nonexistance.

My morality is completely compatible with liberal Christianity. My atheism has nothing to do with morality.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

My morality is just different from yours.

In essence it's just Right and Wrong, simplified. So, we can't both be right and wrong if there is one correct morality (my beleif). So, If I am indeed Correct about God, then I am right, you are wrong. If I am incorrect, then we are both relatively correct.

My morality is completely compatible with liberal Christianity. My atheism has nothing to do with morality.

What I mean to say is that due to my Christianity I see only one morality, as nothing else can contradict the word of God. If your morality is indeed inline with God's word, then we probably share the same morality.

[Dayman]

In essence it's just Right and Wrong, simplified. So, we can't both be right and wrong if there is one correct morality (my beleif). So, If I am indeed Correct about God, then I am right, you are wrong. If I am incorrect, then we are both relatively correct.

Ok, so were down to opinion, basically.

What I mean to say is that due to my Christianity I see only one morality, as nothing else can contradict the word of God. If your morality is indeed inline with God's word, then we probably share the same morality.

I doubt many people's morality are in line with the big man's word for word.

[gaius valerius]

Your morality is wrong. As mine is backed up by God.

But that's just my beleif.

So, who knows.

My morality all depends on God's existance, and yours depends on his nonexistance.

Atheïst are de facto immoral bastards, greedy, selfish, lying, hypocrite... huray for me... :hmmm:

[Ó Cathasaigh]

Ok, so were down to opinion, basically.

Yeah, pretty much.

I doubt many people's morality are in line with the big man's word for word.

You'd be correct. Luckily he's supposed to be a forgiving chap.

[Dayman]

You'd be correct. Luckily he's supposed to be a forgiving chap.

Ok then, if you yourself don't take God's morality 100%, are you willing to admit along those lines that you yourself are then immoral? And then not qualified to make judgments on other's morality?

[Ó Cathasaigh]

Ok then, if you yourself don't take God's morality 100%, are you willing to admit along those lines that you yourself are then immoral?

Of course. That's why I'm a Christian, because I realize I'm immoral. There was a quote that I'll roughly paraphrase "Church is not a place for Good people to strut their stuff, but a rehab center for sinners" something along those lines.

And then not qualified to make judgments on other's morality?

Do not judge, lest ye be judged. That's the basic concept. But again, we're not exaclty Christlike ourselves, so we often judge people. We shouldn't, but we do. Of course informing people things like "hey stealing is wrong" isn't too bad is it?

[Dayman]

Of course informing people things like "hey stealing is wrong" isn't too bad is it?

I'm not saying your commentary is not allowed, but that it's merely an opinion and doesn't carry ultimate weight.