Is morality absolute or relative?

Does moral relativism mean that to be truly free, we must be free from our cultural-religious bias? Must we be free from our 'conscience' so we can think outside of the box. Lets think about that carefully. I don't have a problem with questioning the reality we've been sold so to speak, but this has serious implications.
Skepticism is healthy but does this not border on insanity? Does our conscious originate with man, or is it transcendant and divine in origin?Imagine the unlimited possibilities, unlimited by 'conscience', which is nothing more than that lingering sense that 'this isn't right'. Let's free ourselves from that bias. Just let it go and, "Imagine there's no heaven". Think of all the possibilities of human endeavor that we could experience the restrictions of conscious. That nagging little voice that bogs us down. No more conflict between your heart and head. No more bias. "No more hang-ups man!”No more of those restrictions that have kept humanity from doing such great things as indiscriminately raping, torturing, and slowly murdering each other in manners that have yet to be explored and enjoyed, piece, by, piece. Just imagine the possibilities. They're limitless! Most have only flirted in their youth, with the real freedom that waits for all over the hill of true open-mindedness. (By the way, ask me to show you a person with an open mind, and I'll show you a person in a maximum security penitentiary enjoying solitary confinement! Hi Charlie manson...) Imagine the glory! That unseen potential we've never allowed ourselves to experience. What could be calling us? What have we been restricted from learning because of that dog-gone little voice?"Have another hit man, and be free from that prison".I know what's calling us, and these questions make it pretty clear in my mind. Pure adulterated Evil! Why this step by step approach, how about just taking this all to a point in its logical extension. How about participating in an open-minded concoction of Ecstasy and LSD while engaged in a necro-beastial orgy, on a judges bench, during court proceedings that will argue the irrelevance of the U.S. constitution, on the basis that it is discriminatory because of it's foundations in the teachings of Christ, and it's condemnation of the desires of the 'free spirit'. "Whoa man, now that’s freedom!"Is that what freedom is? I contend that it is those ideas leads to more imprisonment by the consequences of lawless action. I further contend that real freedom has been lost long ago, and it is the real freedom from this 'sin manifested reality' we now live in. That freedom is 'real' and secured by obeying the divine and natural laws of our creator, be it physical or moral.I would love any thoughts...

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

quote:

---

Does moral relativism mean that to be truly free, we must be free from our cultural-religious bias?

---

No. Moral relativism means that there is no absolute standard by which to judge moral and ethical decisions.

---

"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the same sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
-- H. L. Mencken (quoted on Panda's Thumb)

Is that your position? Or is that an objective truth? Do you believe that there is no absolute standard? And if so, how can you know?Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

---

Any biters in the stream?

So far no one has been able to show us any absolute morality. There might be one but as of yet, none have been put forward.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, it seems to be the standard definition of moral relativism. From wikipedia: I have seen your definition of moral relativism before, but usually only by religious advocates of one type or another decry their percieved lack of morality in today's society.

---

"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the same sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
-- H. L. Mencken (quoted on Panda's Thumb)

I just think that if morality exists, then it must necessarily be absolute. Otherwise, we get the clash of relative truths...If one say's it is incorrect for me to impose morality on him, is he saying that it is 'wrong' to do so? Then, by denying me the ability to do what I think is right, is he not imposing his morality on me? More interesting, is that in the absence of a creator, imposing one's 'own' morality is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, given he has the strength to enforce it.After all, if there is no such thing as God, then there is no assumption of purpose. It's just survival of the fittest and the fittest takes all. I'm not suggesting that natural selection doesn't take place. I'm saying that in addition, morals either exist, or they don't. If they do, we don't create them.

so give us an example.

quote:

---

I just think that if morality exists...

---

I believe that it is wrong to interfere with a mother's right to terminate her pregnancy. There, that's proof that morality exists.

quote:

---

...then it must necessarily be absolute.

---

Pat Robertson believes that it is wrong to allow a mother to terminate her pregnancy. There, that proves morality is relative.What is the issue?

---

"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the same sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
-- H. L. Mencken (quoted on Panda's Thumb)

With greater freedom comes greater responsibility. Without an artificial morality imposed by some outside source, we are more dependent on our own consciences to tell us "this isn't right".

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

1. You shall not worship any other god but YHWH.2. You shall not make a graven image.3. You shall not take the name of YHWH in vain.4. You shall not break the Sabbath.5. You shall not dishonor your parents.6. You shall not murder.7. You shall not commit adultery8. You shall not steal.9. You shall not commit perjury.10. You shall not covet.

Okay, I believe that is what you believe.So what is an example of an absolute moral?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Nope! It just means that both of you can't be reflecting what is the objective standard...

Oh you mean that god! What if they sexually abuse and beat you from day one?

I guess the problem, then, is that I cannot concieve of an abosolute standard of morality. Morality deals with right and wrong. Right and wrong are subjective opinions. So as long as two individuals can have different opinions as to what is right and what is wrong, then morality must be subjective.