Would the world be a happier place if everyone were atheist ?

[Kanamori]

Anyone who says relativism is a farce needs to immediately stop cutting their hair and stop wearing any fiber blend or polyester clothing and be a kosher halal vegetarian that never works on Sunday, and never have their picture taken nor possess photographs of other humans. That's just a short list of things that will start applying to you if you throw out relativism.

Unless you can start proving which ones are right or wrong.

Edit:
Or basically if you ever can say "I have morals, but not these morals" then you're enjoying a choice afforded to you by relativism whether you like it or not.

I see it this way: something either is or it is not. There may be circumstances that change the shades of the morality of a situation/action, but to say that there is morality but that it's purely relative is to say that it doesn't actually exist. I cannot prove morality, but long ago I came to the conclusion that I couldn't KNOW for myself by myself, but the choice of whether or not I should shoot some random person was obvious an obvious no. Given the choice between assuming it's presence or non existence, I choose to assume its presence. The exact definition of what is moral and what is not is something that I won't presume to say I KNOW. I don't wear polyester but I'm not sure what the hair trimming is about... I should give it away? I would agree that that's probably the best thing to do... and I am a vegetarian

 

[sprinkles]

I see it this way: something either is or it is not. There may be circumstances that change the shades of the morality of a situation/action, but to say that there is morality but that it's purely relative is to say that it doesn't actually exist. I cannot prove morality, but long ago I came to the conclusion that I couldn't KNOW for myself by myself, but the choice of whether or not I should shoot some random person was obvious an obvious no. Given the choice between assuming it's presence or non existence, I choose to assume its presence. The exact definition of what is moral and what is not is something that I won't presume to say I KNOW.

This is based on a misunderstanding of what relative means. It is not to say that morality doesn't exist.

If it didn't exist, we wouldn't say it is relative. We'd say there's no such thing.

To say that something "is or is not" isn't quite accurate when it comes to reality. e.g. you're sitting still but you're also moving depending on where you look at it from - both are real and valid.

 

[LucyJr]

People think they can mix morality with all kind of shit and make a soup out of it, where you have a bit of everything.
That is the soup of relativism.

Morality is different...very different. It has another nature, that which stand against relativism, in powerful and glorious contrast. It is objective, unchangeable, un-mixed into soups, it has originality, a dignity to it, a "one piece" material, that can never be broken, because of its pride and glory. Its nature is objectivity, or non-relativistic.

 

[Matt3737]

As sprinkles points out morality is not relative to an individual, but amongst peoples. You may see killing as inherently wrong, but some ancient societies believed in the necessity of ritual sacrifice. That is a different (hence relative) moral judgment about human life. To you, your view is right and theirs was wrong and conversely they may have seen your view as being wrong and theirs as right.

There is no objective standard we can measure either viewpoint against except the one we subscribe to. That doesn't mean subjectivity is a useless position or without merit. Having a subjective stance is more important because there is no singular standard in which to defer to. Nearly every important perspective is inherently a theoretical or subjective interpretation of objective data.

Your belief in being objective does not hold water. Relativity does not make one's morality a pick and choose game either.

 

[LucyJr]

As sprinkles points out morality is not relative to an individual, but amongst peoples. You may see killing as inherently wrong, but some ancient societies believed in the necessity of ritual sacrifice. That is a different (hence relative) moral judgment about human life. To you, your view is right and theirs was wrong and conversely they may have seen your view as being wrong and theirs as right.

That is relativity of opinion, not morality. And you are a idiot. I don't know what logic are you studying!

There is no objective standard we can measure either viewpoint against except the one we subscribe to. That doesn't mean subjectivity is a useless position or without merit. Having a subjective stance is more important because there is no singular standard in which to defer to. Nearly every important perspective is inherently a theoretical or subjective interpretation of objective data.

More stupid things. Please stop posting, this is embarrassing.

Your belief in being objective does not hold water. Relativity does not make one's morality a pick and choose game either.

ghh...its just...no man! Leave it please!

 

[LucyJr]

[MENTION=4822]Matt3737[/MENTION]

Until you don't think seriously at it, you won't get it. Exactly like [MENTION=3224]Kanamori[/MENTION] said, if morality is relative, there is actualy no morality.
You either get it, or you will writte stupid argumentations.
This is one of the rare things which you have to seriously think at it.

 

[Matt3737]

[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION]

Your outburst tells me that you're frustrated and do not know how to respond.

If you have any confidence in your judgments, your reasoning, your understanding of logic, or any wisdom you believe you possess, then by all means, please enlighten me.

 

[Lark]

Relativism in morality is nothing other than rationalisation of bad behaviour.

Its never used to explain or encourage exemplary behaviour but as an excuse and the continued equating of wrong doing behaviour with the human, all too human, instead of something less than human.

 

[LucyJr]

[MENTION=9401]LucyJr[/MENTION]

Your outburst tells me that you're frustrated and do not know how to respond.

Its not the kind of outburst you are thinking at at all. Now when I see your response I see the typical idiotic message.

If you have any confidence in your judgments, your reasoning, your understanding of logic, or any wisdom you believe you possess, then by all means, please enlighten me.

My confidence goes as far to tell you to think more before posting something.
Hint: what you wrotte there is wrong!