What is Moral Relativism? Carried over from Existentalism thread

[Khayr]

I thought that it would be appropriate to start a new thread. Reason being a particular subject matter emerged in another thread, that more aptly required its own space.

 

dare assert that human moral values don't need religions or Gods , a simple emperical proof for that is the millions of agnostics/atheists who live and lead a moral life every single day.

 

A genuine moral act "always" constitutes the desire that others do well , without that an action fails to qualify beeing moral, that we eat our dinner is not particularly moral , neither is grudgingly helping NGONGE whom we otherwise wish to drop dead is a moral act, and it is absolutely not morality to help someone besouce that someone or someone else on his behalf either threatens you with punishment or promises you a reward.

 

 

J.B. ( I take it Cara too) is your defintion of Morality. Might this be one of the reasons, if not the MAIN reason why you reject Religion?

[Cara.]

Originally posted by Khayr:

I thought that it would be appropriate to start a new thread. Reason being a particular subject matter emerged in another thread, that more aptly required its own space.

 

dare assert that human moral values don't need religions or Gods , a simple emperical proof for that is the millions of agnostics/atheists who live and lead a moral life every single day.

 

A genuine moral act "always" constitutes the desire that others do well , without that an action fails to qualify beeing moral, that we eat our dinner is not particularly moral , neither is grudgingly helping NGONGE whom we otherwise wish to drop dead is a moral act, and it is absolutely not morality to help someone besouce that someone or someone else on his behalf either threatens you with punishment or promises you a reward.

 

 

J.B. ( I take it Cara too) is your defintion of Morality. Might this be one of the reasons, if not the MAIN reason why you reject Religion?

No, it's not a major reason. But it's something worth discussing.

[Socod_badne]

What is Moral Relativism?

 

What is this? Grammatical joke? While you're at throw in other equally meaningless questions like what is justice?, what is beauty?, what is bad. These and other similar questions can not, ipso facto, provide useful discourse as they'll inevitable descend into mere opinions. And you know opinions are worth a dime a dozen.

 

Moreover, when did is morality relative or absolute? morph into What is Moral Relativism?? Seriously, do you think gratuitousness and peddling Non Sequiturs is a virtue. If not then I implore you to take shots against impertinence because your penchant for impertinence is that bad. So bad that it fits pathological disorder profile. Good luck, you sure need it.

 

Back to the pertinent subject of this thread: Is morality absolute or relative?

 

This is meaningful question unlike the question in the title of this thread. In the case of this thread's title, no usefull answer can be attainted as there's no impartial parameters or body of evidence to settle it one way or another. Contrast that with Is morality absolute or relative?. Here we DO have a fair arbitrer; stats. Take a survey of different cultures and for every conceivably moral question summons plethora of dissimilar takes. To some, terrorism is legitimate method. To others, often those at the recieving end, it's indefensible method. Take other subjects like the Death Penalty, Sex Crimes, Cannabolism etc... you'll find weatlh of dissimilar approaches by each unique culture/civilisation.

 

Q.E.D. morality is relative.

 

 

Lastly, and this touches on somewhat extraneous but nevertheless noteworthy point that was raised by JB. It is this: does morality hinge upon Religion? Put differently, without religion can one have moral scruples? To me the point is mute one. It's also anachronistic as well. Hammurabi Code of Laws are the oldest codified human ethics/morals. More than 4000 yrs old, these laws layout appropriate actions on subjects such as Theft, Marriage, Women's rights, Childrens rights, murder and so on. Unmistakeably of human artifice, not of divine providence. Therefore establishing beyond debate the fact religion doesn't militate morality.

[Khayr]

dare assert that human moral values don't need religions or Gods , a simple emperical proof for that is the millions of agnostics/atheists who live and lead a moral life every single day.

 

If human moral values don't need religion, then what is the yardistic for MORALITY?

 

A genuine moral act "always" constitutes the desire that others do well

 

Whom determines what is 'WELL'?

 

Eating dinner can become a moral or an immoral act. i.e. Eating human carcasses (immoral)

 

 

Take a survey of different cultures and for every conceivably moral question summons plethora of dissimilar takes. To some, terrorism is legitimate method. To others, often those at the recieving end, it's indefensible method. Take other subjects like the Death Penalty, Sex Crimes, Cannabolism etc... you'll find weatlh of dissimilar approaches by each unique culture/civilisation.

 

So because there exists difference in people's interpretation of such subjects, then that negatives the Absolute Morality?

 

I am sure that there some Absolute Morals that you can identify with-i.e.

 

• Not inncocently murdering others

• not stealing

• not lying etc.

More than 4000 yrs old, these laws layout appropriate actions on subjects such as Theft, Marriage, Women's rights, Childrens rights, murder and so on. Unmistakeably of human artifice, not of divine providence. Therefore establishing beyond debate the fact religion doesn't militate morality.

 

If they were layed out 4000yrs ago, then why the denial in the play of influence of REVELATION in those ancient civilizations?

 

Could not the mayans or mesopatamians have encountered Revelation and a Prophet?

[Khayr]

So, let me ask you the question you beg to answer.

As a religious person ,how do you rationalize your morals? why do you act morally? becouse God says so or becouse God will punish you if you don't or reward you if you do?

 

Are you of the idea that religious people's morality and system of ethics are based on Reason?

 

Rationality and Reason-Can the Religious have Rationality and Reason in their Faith in GOD?

 

To be cont'd....

[Socod_badne]

Beautiful soliloquy!

 

 

On a sour note, your dialogue is lacking.

[Khayr]

SB,

 

Somehow you remind me of this character from the Simpsons

 

 

 

"Is there a word in Klingon for loneliness"

 

On an additional note,

 

I was reviewing old SOL posts dealing with these characters and their uni-dimensional arguments. What I've come to find out is that they have been refuted over and over again, ad nausium.

[Socod_badne]

dp

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Khayr:

dare assert that human moral values don't need religions or Gods ,

What did I finish through saying in my last post? Did I not "dare" you? You're waiting until I double dare you before you address my post?

 

Tell me, do these gimmicks of yours work with others. Do they get you laid? Honestly, I don't understand why you persist with them.

 

 

a simple emperical proof for that is the millions of agnostics/atheists who live and lead a moral life every single day

I haven't a clue as to what you're saying here. But judging from the past, it's prolly you on a tangent again.

 

 

If human moral values don't need religion, then what is the

yardistic for MORALITY?

 

There is no yardstick for morality since morality is relative. For morality to exist, religion is not absolute neccessity. These are my two positions, both are statements of fact. Enough with tangentiality, rebuff them or go away.

 

 

A genuine moral act "always" constitutes the desire that others do well

 

That's one definition. I should give a toss, why exactly?

 

 

Whom determines what is 'WELL'?

 

People.

 

 

I am sure that there some Absolute Morals that you can identify with-i.e.

 

• Not inncocently murdering others

• not stealing

• not lying etc.

Again, morality is relative. That's an empirical fact. Stop repeating the same mindless lines in place of cogent articulation. If you disagre with morality being relative all you gotta do is present your counter-arguement. Everyone of your examples in the list above is relative. Lying in some circumstances is acceptable, in others it's not. Please don't ask me to give you examples.

 

 

If they were layed out 4000yrs ago, then why the denial in the play of influence of REVELATION in those ancient civilizations?

Do you have reading deficit or something? They were not revealed. But commissioned to be codified by King Hammurabi of Mesopotamia (some of them predated his reign). The goal of citing them was to further substantiate the claim morality doesn't depend on religion.

 

 

Could not the mayans or mesopatamians have encountered Revelation and a Prophet?

Maybe, maybe not. But that's got absolutely no bearings on this discussion. Hummirabi Code of Laws are human made, with no sign of numina.