Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does "dictatorship of relativism" exist?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Can Benedict XVI restore Catholicism to Britain?

    You Brits have been out of the Catholic fold long enough! I mean, at least Luther had a pretty good argument prepared with a list of compelling reasons for leaving the church. Henry VIII's reason - he needed an annulment and the pope wouldnt grant it! On Monday, Benedictus warned against "a dictatorship of relativism, which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one's own ego and one's own desires." Right. So considering that your church was borne out of a lecherous Tudor king's ego, this is a warning to stop your misbehaving and come back to R.C. church! Else Benedict XVI will put the smack down on ya!

    Comment


    • #32
      Tragic in that we have to choose between beautiful illusion and naked reality.


      Ah yes... sorry, skimmed over that part. And I agree with the last sentance (everything after the 'we can argue' part).
      “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
      - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Oerdin
        I don't know anyone who believes all moral values are equal. I've never heard anyone advocate that idea either other then one far out poster here at poly. I think what he's rail against is everyone who doesn't agree with his values.
        *sigh*

        Relativism is the statement - the blindingly obvious statement - that there's no way to establish any particular moral code as "true". Clearly you cannot perform an experiment to measure morality, and just as obviously there is no reason to assume that any particular set of moral axioms are correct a priori.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Dracon II
          A relativistic society, in the absence of an overriding principle or constitution, would resemble Thraymachus' conception of justice; being that justice is the "will of the strongest".
          That's ALWAYS true. "Justice" is the will of the strongest. In our case, the liberals (in a broad sense) are the strongest, and that is why our society is a liberal democracy.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Agathon
            But relativism doesn't yield tolerance either. Under moral relativism "tolerance" becomes just another one of the relative values.

            Relativism only helps conservatives. How ironic.
            Good. I'm liking this pope more and more. That's all.
            “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
            "Capitalism ho!"

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Agathon
              But relativism doesn't yield tolerance either. Under moral relativism "tolerance" becomes just another one of the relative values.

              Relativism only helps conservatives. How ironic.
              Good. I'm liking this pope more and more. That's all.
              “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
              "Capitalism ho!"

              Comment


              • #37
                Relativism is the statement - the blindingly obvious statement - that there's no way to establish any particular moral code as "true". Clearly you cannot perform an experiment to measure morality, and just as obviously there is no reason to assume that any particular set of moral axioms are correct a priori.


                No it isn't. That's moral scepticism. Scepticism could be true and yet a single moral code could exist -- it's just that we wouldn't know it. Relativism is different: it specifies that the acceptability of a moral code is relative to a person or a group.

                Why do you assume that moral truths have to be a priori? In fact why do you believe in the a priori at all? That's so old fashioned.

                That's ALWAYS true. "Justice" is the will of the strongest. In our case, the liberals (in a broad sense) are the strongest, and that is why our society is a liberal democracy.


                Here you are just confused. Justice need not be identified with the will of the strongest -- what they do may well be unjust, even if they call it "justice".

                You are making a version of Euthyphro's mistake about piety. In other words: is what is just, (1) just because it is enforced by those in power; or (2) is what is just enforced by those in power because they believe it is just.

                Your original statement is ambiguous between (1) and (2). If (2) is true then it allows for those who rule to be persuaded by reason, since it is a matter of beliefs, not of arbitrary power. In fact that is the case in our society: morality is not determined by force alone, but by reason giving. You generally don't have to threaten to beat the crap out of someone to get them to do the right thing -- you just explain to them why it is the right thing to do -- works 99 times out of 100 and no force required.


                Hence you get an F on this paper.

                You should take some basic philosophy to remedy your ignorance on these matters.
                Only feebs vote.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Kuciwalker


                  That's ALWAYS true. "Justice" is the will of the strongest. In our case, the liberals (in a broad sense) are the strongest, and that is why our society is a liberal democracy.
                  Yeah... later in the post I concede that your point can be made. Personally I believe it... it's just a dangerous thing to believe.
                  That's why I say pure relativism is an abstract concept... not necessarily because it is essentially so, but because it must be. We can hold a belief in pure relativism at an academic level, but in real life we must accept that society needs a governing principle, and that this principle must be made legitimate, in order for society to function properly.
                  It could be argued however, that given the objective conditions that exist in society, there are better and more prudent organising principles than others.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Actually, after reading Agathon's argument, I see his point. Justice can become a power in itself if legitimated, and can thus be used to critique power....

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I'll prevent myself from indulging once again in this "beautiful" debate, I'll just state my point of view:

                      Relativism isn't just a wrong idea, it's a bad idea.
                      urgh.NSFW

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Relativism is a truth and is something that people will eventually need to realize.

                        It's not a bad idea when it's a useful tool to understand any civilization.

                        It's not a bad idea when you put into focus that someone doesn't have to be harmed if they do not think they can be harmed because of the way civilization had taught them.

                        Just beause it's a new idea doesn't mean it's automatically wrong because it goes against human nature. Plus, things that go against human nature generally are true.
                        "Compromises are not always good things. If one guy wants to drill a five-inch hole in the bottom of your life boat, and the other person doesn't, a compromise of a two-inch hole is still stupid." - chegitz guevara
                        "Bill3000: The United Demesos? Boy, I was young and stupid back then.
                        Jasonian22: Bill, you are STILL young and stupid."

                        "is it normal to imaginne dartrh vader and myself in a tjhreee way with some hot chick? i'ts always been my fantasy" - Dis

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Relativism is a truth and is something that people will eventually need to realize.


                          Do you realize how funny this sounds?
                          Only feebs vote.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Just beause it's a new idea


                            It's not a new idea, really.
                            urgh.NSFW

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Kuciwalker
                              Clearly you cannot perform an experiment to measure morality, and just as obviously there is no reason to assume that any particular set of moral axioms are correct a priori.
                              These statements are both only partially true. Science CAN measure moral reasoning, and moral reasoning falls within a hierarchy of moral reasoning stages that everyone goes through. No one relapses from a higher stage of moral reasoning to a lower one, hence the higher stages of moral reasoning are "better" in that they solve more moral dilemmas. See the works of Kohlberg et al for examples of this.

                              So, while no specific set of moral axioms is "correct" specific sets of moral reasoning axioms are "more correct' than others, in that they solve more moral dilemmas and are discovered later in the development of the personality.
                              The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty…we will be remembered in spite of ourselves… The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the last generation… We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth.
                              - A. Lincoln

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Bill3000
                                Relativism is a truth and is something that people will eventually need to realize.
                                Actually is means there is no truth.
                                I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                                - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X