Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-06-2014, 01:46 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
Forgive me if I've missed some points, as I've only skimmed this thread. I'd like to share my views on Moral Relativism. I consider myself a Moral Relativist, but probably not 100%. I agree with the Wiccans who say "Do as thou wilt, but harm none." I personally believe that you can do anything you want so long as you aren't harming anyone. Rape, murder, and theft are wrong because it negatively impacts others. I suppose one could do an act that negatively impacts someone so long as it prevents a greater negative impact on a person or people. I know that's simplistic; but that's my view.

I find it ironic that the religion that says man is the center of the universe is the same one that says arrogance is a sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2014, 04:06 AM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
(10-06-2014 01:46 PM)cre8ivmind Wrote:  Forgive me if I've missed some points, as I've only skimmed this thread. I'd like to share my views on Moral Relativism. I consider myself a Moral Relativist, but probably not 100%. I agree with the Wiccans who say "Do as thou wilt, but harm none." I personally believe that you can do anything you want so long as you aren't harming anyone. Rape, murder, and theft are wrong because it negatively impacts others. I suppose one could do an act that negatively impacts someone so long as it prevents a greater negative impact on a person or people. I know that's simplistic; but that's my view.

[Image: rise_from_your_grave.jpg]

The OP is over 3 years old, start a new thread...

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
12-06-2014, 06:16 AM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
I believe its wrong regardless. I do have the right to look back at a society and say "that is wrong" based on the standard that harming someone for no "just" reason is is objectively harmful. With a secular humanist worldview I think you can judge things based on the objective truths that are being demonstrated (harm, suffering, lack of well-being, etc).

“Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way.

-Christopher Hitchens
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Just Another Atheist's post
14-06-2014, 11:31 AM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
(06-06-2011 10:13 PM)godofskeptic Wrote:  So i've been thinking about morality for a long time, but I can't decide if morality is relative or if it is absolute, and if it evolves!

Sam Harris always say that morality is like health, you never say that a person who likes to vomit is healthy! (he gives many examples). He also said that you don't question your doctor when he tells you you have a problem. So to Harris, morality is fairly objective and we just need to discover the moral values (or i am wrong and he says something else?)

I sometimes think morality is relative, but then again it can be absolute!Huh
What do you guys/girls thinks?

Also, do you think morality evolves?
Morality is a code of values that is chosen from a set of alternatives. It is relative in that it depends on a chosen standard of value.

If your standard of value is man's life you will choose a very different set of values than if your standard is pain or suffering or self sacrifice.

A prime example of this is the Christian morality which is based on self sacrifice, self denial and self abnegation as its standard of value. According to this moral premise acting in one's own self interest is evil. Surrendering one's interests for the interests of another is good.

The fact that morality has to be chosen does not mean that there are not objective moral values.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 02:36 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
Yorick was here.

[Image: big_thumb_6bff656dfa33a3b09fe1c7f3509c719f.jpg]

A person very dear to me was badly hurt through a misunderstanding and miscommunication. For this, I am sorry, and he knows it. That said, any blaming me for malicious intent is for the birds. I will not wear some scarlet letter, I will not be anybody's whipping girl, and I will not lurk in silence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 07:16 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
(14-06-2014 02:36 PM)Charis Wrote:  Yorick was here.

[Image: big_thumb_6bff656dfa33a3b09fe1c7f3509c719f.jpg]

The fuck is this thing?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 05:47 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
Quote:So i've been thinking about morality for a long time, but I can't decide if morality is relative or if it is absolute, and if it evolves!

Oh it's evolving. The most telling example I can think of would be teenage pregnancies. During the 50'ies and 60'ies the rate of teenage pregnancies in the States was about twice as high as today, but it was socially (morally) acceptable because the girl either was married or got married (in a hurry). Compare that with the view on the subject today.

Another example: During the late 60'ies and the 70'ies If you was 25 years or older and had a 15 year mistress, you were a MAN. Today you'd be a creep.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2014, 02:07 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
Morality does not exist. Only rationale oughts.

“Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way.

-Christopher Hitchens
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-08-2014, 01:48 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
(06-06-2011 10:13 PM)godofskeptic Wrote:  So i've been thinking about morality for a long time, but I can't decide if morality is relative or if it is absolute, and if it evolves!

Check out Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - basically Kohlberg identified a series of stages through which an individual's moral development tends to grow, or "evolve" during their lifetime.

As a related phenomena, when viewed through the (memetic) Spiral Dynamics lens, societies are also seen to go through discrete stages of development - these stages resonate with Kohlberg's stages.

In spiral dynamics terms, moral relativism is an attribute of a "Green" (or postmodern) worldview.

Whereas the spiral dynamics "Blue" (or traditionalist worldview) operates from a principle of moral absolutism.

Essentially - as a human psychological system, moral relativism is just moral absolutism with an extra dimension of cognitive complexity added, which enables a person to relativise the value systems of different human beings.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2014, 02:31 PM
RE: Moral Relativism Vs. Absolute Morality, and Does morality evolve?
I've been looking into this topic or a few years now. Here is some basic positions I've made. I'll start with...
Collective Premise I General Morality
a) All living things that have observable behaviors can be examined as pursuing subjective “values”.
b) All living things may have values that are not actually perceived by a conscience, subconscious or intelligible mind.
c) These values may be as simple as survival, reproduction and sustenance
d) These values may be complex and counter-productive, yet still express “worth” to the individuals or group of individuals
e) These values and behaviors may not accurately represent something objectively as “good” or “bad”
f) Morality may be examined by an observable behavior based on “values” found of “worth”
Conclusion I
All living things express behaviors based on values that may make up moral systems.

And just to clarify these terms
Morality (noun) is a standard of a set rules or guides that are based on subjective values found of “worth” that instructs the learned behaviors of evolutionary biological (or cognitive intelligent, TBA) beings as they relate to other biological or cognitive intelligent entities either directly or indirectly.

Values (noun) are tangible and intangible ideas, items, concepts, systems, behaviors, philosophies, etc. that reflects worth to an individual or a group of individual as desirable, important or useful. (antonym; adversatives)

Good (adjective/adverb) describes an object, action or conclusion that provides a virtuous character or preferred benefit that clearly outweighs any detriments to evolutionary biological or cognitive intelligent entities either directly or indirectly.

Bad (adjective/adverb) describes an object, action or conclusion that provides an unvirtuous character or detriment that clearly outweighs any preferred benefits to evolutionary biological or cognitive intelligent entities either directly or indirectly.

I have more, but this is a good place to start.Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mortimer Snerd's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: