Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 25
  1. #1
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112

    Moral Relativism or Moral absolutism

    Moral relativism
    Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.

    Moral absolutism
    Moral absolutism is an ethical view that certain actions are absolutely right or wrong, regardless of other circumstances such as their consequences or the intentions behind them.

    To keep it clean
    State your reason:
    then an example:
    same with counter arguments

    @Aborted your usually amazing at these kinds of things

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Poison For This Useful Post:

    Zuhrain (04-14-2014)

  3. #2
    Ferris Bueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    KFC
    Posts
    6,706
    Reputation
    409
    Thanks
    846
    My Mood
    Hot
    I'm going to lean towards relativsm on this one because I believe that absolutism doesn't work well in most things.

    "“Religions are, by definition, metaphors, after all: God is a dream, a hope, a woman, an ironist, a father, a city, a house of many rooms, a watchmaker who left his prize chronometer in the desert, someone who loves you—even, perhaps, against all evidence, a celestial being whose only interest is to make sure your football team, army, business, or marriage thrives, prospers, and triumphs over all opposition. Religions are places to stand and look and act, vantage points from which to view the world. So none of this is happening. Such things could not occur. Never a word of it is literally true.” .”
    I was Martin Johnson

  4. #3
    Empire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Gender
    male
    Location
    .Alwayz.
    Posts
    19,901
    Reputation
    659
    Thanks
    1,345
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Both.

    There are certain ethical violations that no matter what the time are still wrong. Now pragmatically you can say this or that was the right thing to do in certain scenarios, but morally there are some things like: Slavery, murder, and rape (and other hard-moral topics) that are timeless and without culture influence.

    Arguing that something is morally because a society accepted it now or in the past is irvrelevant to morality and what ethics stands for.

    However the minor moral issues, are more cultural based.


  5. #4
    Aborted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    male
    Location
    Shitpost Defense
    Posts
    17,471
    Reputation
    3076
    Thanks
    6,394
    My Mood
    Twisted
    To create a new term entirely, Relative Moral Absolutism. Certain actions are generally timelessly regarded as immoral, regardless of minority beliefs, though they are just as equally correct. One may make the argument that there is only one true point of morality, though I'd tend to disagree. Morality is an incredibly complex issue, as no one belief or viewpoint is correct, and is based solely on personal opinion. For example, Islam today still considers honor killings entirely moral, while most of us in the developed world see them as entirely unjustified and wholly barbaric. The argument lies in which viewpoint is based on morality, and which one isn't, which is completely impossible to determine. Forgetting the previous statement though, I'd like to move to the relative section of my statement. It really depends on the situation whether something can be justified, such as murder in the case of self-defense, though some people still believe even that is still immoral. It depends completely on personal opinion, though most governments are based on popular belief.
    When the earth is changed into a humid dungeon,
    In which Hope like a bat
    Goes beating the walls with her timid wings
    And knocking her head against the rotten ceiling;
    When the rain stretching out its endless train
    Imitates the bars of a vast prison
    And a silent horde of loathsome spiders
    Comes to spin their webs in the depths of our brains,
    All at once the bells leap with rage
    And hurl a frightful roar at heaven,
    Even as wandering spirits with no country
    Burst into a stubborn, whimpering cry.
    — And without drums or music, long hearses
    Pass by slowly in my soul; Hope, vanquished,
    Weeps, and atrocious, despotic Anguish
    On my bowed skull plants her black flag.

  6. #5
    Ferris Bueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    KFC
    Posts
    6,706
    Reputation
    409
    Thanks
    846
    My Mood
    Hot
    Quote Originally Posted by Empire View Post
    Both.

    There are certain ethical violations that no matter what the time are still wrong. Now pragmatically you can say this or that was the right thing to do in certain scenarios, but morally there are some things like: Slavery, murder, and rape (and other hard-moral topics) that are timeless and without culture influence.

    Arguing that something is morally because a society accepted it now or in the past is irvrelevant to morality and what ethics stands for.

    However the minor moral issues, are more cultural based.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aborted View Post
    To create a new term entirely, Relative Moral Absolutism. Certain actions are generally timelessly regarded as immoral, regardless of minority beliefs, though they are just as equally correct. One may make the argument that there is only one true point of morality, though I'd tend to disagree. Morality is an incredibly complex issue, as no one belief or viewpoint is correct, and is based solely on personal opinion. For example, Islam today still considers honor killings entirely moral, while most of us in the developed world see them as entirely unjustified and wholly barbaric. The argument lies in which viewpoint is based on morality, and which one isn't, which is completely impossible to determine. Forgetting the previous statement though, I'd like to move to the relative section of my statement. It really depends on the situation whether something can be justified, such as murder in the case of self-defense, though some people still believe even that is still immoral. It depends completely on personal opinion, though most governments are based on popular belief.
    See I was going to propose a mix but the term absolute scares me. Furthermore morals and beliefs are extremely complicated things that can not have a set value or meaning.

    Even the values that are immortal change in some way or transform into a completely different thing.

    Killing has always been considered immoral and wrong, but then it transformed into honor killings. Honor killings have been accepted throughout history.(Most ancient cultures and some present day religions). Then there's self defense, which you mentioned.

    This is a great topic but I think staying open minded to the situation is how morals should be, which is why i think relativism is a better option.

    "“Religions are, by definition, metaphors, after all: God is a dream, a hope, a woman, an ironist, a father, a city, a house of many rooms, a watchmaker who left his prize chronometer in the desert, someone who loves you—even, perhaps, against all evidence, a celestial being whose only interest is to make sure your football team, army, business, or marriage thrives, prospers, and triumphs over all opposition. Religions are places to stand and look and act, vantage points from which to view the world. So none of this is happening. Such things could not occur. Never a word of it is literally true.” .”
    I was Martin Johnson

  7. #6
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Empire View Post
    Both.

    There are certain ethical violations that no matter what the time are still wrong. Now pragmatically you can say this or that was the right thing to do in certain scenarios, but morally there are some things like: Slavery, murder, and rape (and other hard-moral topics) that are timeless and without culture influence.

    Arguing that something is morally because a society accepted it now or in the past is irvrelevant to morality and what ethics stands for.

    However the minor moral issues, are more cultural based.
    It is impossible to choose both

  8. #7
    Ferris Bueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    KFC
    Posts
    6,706
    Reputation
    409
    Thanks
    846
    My Mood
    Hot
    Quote Originally Posted by Poison View Post


    It is impossible to choose both
    What they're trying to say is(or at least what i think they're trying to say) is that it's such a complex topic you can't possibly choose one.

    This is due to the infinite possibilities where morality falls into question. Sometimes absolutism is viable and others you have to go with relativism

    "“Religions are, by definition, metaphors, after all: God is a dream, a hope, a woman, an ironist, a father, a city, a house of many rooms, a watchmaker who left his prize chronometer in the desert, someone who loves you—even, perhaps, against all evidence, a celestial being whose only interest is to make sure your football team, army, business, or marriage thrives, prospers, and triumphs over all opposition. Religions are places to stand and look and act, vantage points from which to view the world. So none of this is happening. Such things could not occur. Never a word of it is literally true.” .”
    I was Martin Johnson

  9. #8
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferris Bueller View Post


    What they're trying to say is(or at least what i think they're trying to say) is that it's such a complex topic you can't possibly choose one.

    This is due to the infinite possibilities where morality falls into question. Sometimes absolutism is viable and others you have to go with relativism
    If moral absolution is correct moral relativism can not be correct and vice versa.

  10. #9
    Empire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Gender
    male
    Location
    .Alwayz.
    Posts
    19,901
    Reputation
    659
    Thanks
    1,345
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Quote Originally Posted by Poison View Post

    If moral absolution is correct moral relativism can not be correct and vice versa.
    While this is true you are misunderstanding the point of morality as a whole.

    There are absolutes in morality/ethics.(regardless of society, time, or place).

    There are things that can be morally correct in the scenario but wrong in others.(relative).
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Though....I guess morally correct is the wrong word. "Practical" would be the word. There are times when ethics and morality have to be crossed in scenarios.


    I wouldn't dare assume morality or ethics isn't anything but an illusion though. History shows us that.


  11. #10
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Empire View Post

    While this is true you are misunderstanding the point of morality as a whole.

    There are absolutes in morality/ethics.(regardless of society, time, or place).

    There are things that can be morally correct in the scenario but wrong in others.(relative).
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Though....I guess morally correct is the wrong word. "Practical" would be the word. There are times when ethics and morality have to be crossed in scenarios.


    I wouldn't dare assume morality or ethics isn't anything but an illusion though. History shows us that.
    To make it clear
    use this format
    your Reason:
    then add an example:

  12. #11
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112
    guess no one had any thoughts on the subject

  13. #12
    Ferris Bueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    KFC
    Posts
    6,706
    Reputation
    409
    Thanks
    846
    My Mood
    Hot
    Quote Originally Posted by Poison View Post
    guess no one had any thoughts on the subject
    Don't expect much, Debate Section is dead. Only active people around here are empire, aborted, 666hiddenmaster666, a few newbies, a few dumb religious people, and some athiests.

    "“Religions are, by definition, metaphors, after all: God is a dream, a hope, a woman, an ironist, a father, a city, a house of many rooms, a watchmaker who left his prize chronometer in the desert, someone who loves you—even, perhaps, against all evidence, a celestial being whose only interest is to make sure your football team, army, business, or marriage thrives, prospers, and triumphs over all opposition. Religions are places to stand and look and act, vantage points from which to view the world. So none of this is happening. Such things could not occur. Never a word of it is literally true.” .”
    I was Martin Johnson

  14. #13
    Empire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Gender
    male
    Location
    .Alwayz.
    Posts
    19,901
    Reputation
    659
    Thanks
    1,345
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Quote Originally Posted by Poison View Post
    guess no one had any thoughts on the subject
    That's lame that my post didn't go through.

    Absolute is true.
    Example: Rape/murder/slavery is always wrong regardless of circumstance/time/culture.

    Relativism is also true, but for the "greater good" aspect.
    Example: Lying to someone to protect/help them in the big picture.


    Either way, morality comes second to practicality.


  15. #14
    Poison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    male
    Location
    california
    Posts
    11,460
    Reputation
    524
    Thanks
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by Empire View Post


    That's lame that my post didn't go through.

    Absolute is true.
    Example: Rape/murder/slavery is always wrong regardless of circumstance/time/culture.

    Relativism is also true, but for the "greater good" aspect.
    Example: Lying to someone to protect/help them in the big picture.


    Either way, morality comes second to practicality.
    Is murder rape and slavery wrong? Other people might not think so.
    Reason: Beliefs change over time and through cultures.
    Example: Eskimo killed his father while he was suffering and it was seen as a act of kindness by his people, but it was seen as an immoral evil act by others(most people). At one point slavery was not seen as wrong by many Americans.

    Ill post more later re-watching game of thrones
    I'm not taking a side just want to get more input on your side and just thought up a quick counter argument

  16. #15
    Empire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Gender
    male
    Location
    .Alwayz.
    Posts
    19,901
    Reputation
    659
    Thanks
    1,345
    My Mood
    Pensive
    Quote Originally Posted by Poison View Post


    Is murder rape and slavery wrong? Other people might not think so.
    Reason: Beliefs change over time and through cultures.
    Example: Eskimo killed his father while he was suffering and it was seen as a act of kindness by his people, but it was seen as an immoral evil act by others(most people). At one point slavery was not seen as wrong by many Americans.

    Ill post more later re-watching game of thrones
    I'm not taking a side just want to get more input on your side and just thought up a quick counter argument
    MMmmmmaking a mistake here on relativism.

    Generally you can argue such things as xyz, say it was ok at the time, and if it's not a big offense, then relativism has an argument.

    But to argue morality is completely ok because it was "ok at the time" or "ok in a society" as a whole isn't something relativism is used for because the amount of time or cultural difference required is so vague.


    For instance we accept the Holocaust as wrong. Relativist don't argue this because it's against morality itself. it's putting yourself in a position that is really just the ass who is trying to win an argument based on technicality.



    There are somethings we accept as wrong, regardless of time/culture/scenario. Relativism has it's place, but it's not an all-scenario account.


    ==================================
    ----------/

    Note:Moral absolutism and relativism are used together quite often.

    You might want to check out pragmatism.
    Last edited by Empire; 04-14-2014 at 01:09 AM.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Ajudem aki na moral
    By Paulo_Nick in forum Brazil Spam
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-06-2013, 10:16 AM
  2. A moral boost
    By ZeroTroubles in forum General
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-05-2013, 06:47 PM
  3. Is morality a biological function?
    By C4Vendetta. in forum Debate Fort
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-17-2012, 09:05 PM
  4. libya + Moral question + Rape of nanking
    By radnomguywfq3 in forum General
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-26-2011, 03:02 PM
  5. Moral Oral
    By Gourav2122 in forum Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-19-2010, 09:59 PM