|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Haggard Scandal | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
This, like Theater of the Mind, was OT to be talking about moral relativism.
I got that part. But I'm afraid you don't understand moral relativism. If you understood it, you would recognize that christians are moral relativists. Okay, the seventh day adventists are slightly less relative in their morals than other christians, and I hope you see the point I am making with that example. I sometimes listen to fundies condemning moral relativism, and it is really funny to hear the statements of their own moral relativism mixed in with their condemnation of others. I suggest you try to understand your own moral relativism before you criticise that of others. Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5869 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Billy Graham was once cornered by a tenatious reporter who asked him his thoughts on the Jim Baker scandal... It was imparted to me that Billy does not like to participate in such discourse as this. But the reporter had him pinned.
He responded, (and I paraphrase) "There are thousands of airplanes, some big, some small. They fly thousands of miles and perform all kinds of functions flawlessly, some mundane, others grand... But let one grand jumbo jet crash, and the whole world is gawking at the casualties." Edited by Rob, : No reason given. Edited by AdminJar, : fix unmatched quote "God must know, better than anyone, how unfulfilling it is to be right, until it can be shared, with a community willing to accept it, and enjoy the glory of it."(Rob Lockett) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5869 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else So... Can you shed light on what is wrong with that...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Archer Opteryx Member (Idle past 3618 days) Posts: 1811 From: East Asia Joined: |
Haggard won't be hung by his own standard, but God's. No difference.
quote: ______ Edited by Archer Opterix, : Brevity. Archer All species are transitional.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
What you and almost everyone is seemingly incapable of understanding is that if you are a moral relativist, then morals don't actually exist-- even the ones you maintain.
Well that's not true. Morals exist, just not in an absolute sense. You have a point that they can be more slippery, but only to the extent that one doesn't really care about the moral code one lives by. That would be the same for theists. The idea that a relativist who has a personal code will feel less guilty, because a rule can be changed in theory, is a bit unrealistic.
Aside from which, if we all march to our drummer, then none of us have the right to criticize anyone else's moral standard.
You would have the right, it is just harder to do so with logical strength. Your only logically justified arguments would be criticizing internal consistency of another's system, or to appeal to emotions of the other person (which is essentially inconsistency between system and feelings about the outcomes if a system). But there is yet another problem, lack of morals have little to do with personal behavior. Rather they are about aligning behavior for those whose personal behavior might conflict with some social sense of propriety in a given situation. It is errant to believe that in most cases (in an inate state) most would want to do something that is viewed as wrong. A person's taste may run to honesty or heroism or justice just as easily as their opposites. But whatever their taste is, it is not likely to move back and forth easily. An honest guy, with or without a moral system, or gods, is likely to remain honest because he wants to. The dishonest person, even with a moral system backed by gods, will have to fight his urge and may lose more often than the honest guy. Edited by holmes, : apostrophectomy holmes "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5869 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Morality is not an imposition, unless 'being' is an imposition.
I don't know if we should be ungrateful that God chose to impose being upon us. The alternative is rather unfulfilling. I am just happy that there is one way to be. I'm not going to question any longer why he didn't allow me to be the way I think I should be able to be. Such things are not comprehensible to me since they require infinite knowledge. I'll take the granduer of the mystery. Being all knowing would really spoil my life in some measure. "God must know, better than anyone, how unfulfilling it is to be right, until it can be shared, with a community willing to accept it, and enjoy the glory of it."(Rob Lockett)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5839 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
I sometimes listen to fundies condemning moral relativism, and it is really funny to hear the statements of their own moral relativism mixed in with their condemnation of others.
While that is certainly true, it cuts both ways. I listen to supposedly enlightened, rational, freethinkers condemn moral absolutism, and it is really funny to hear the statements of their own moral absolutism mixed in with their condemnation of others. Wait, no it isn't funny... in either case. holmes "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5869 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Morals exist, just not in an absolute sense. So, morals absolutely do not exist in an absolute state? By inferring a reality (ie. God) you are required to infer an absolute.
quote: Respectfully, FYI Edited by Rob, : No reason given. "God must know, better than anyone, how unfulfilling it is to be right, until it can be shared, with a community willing to accept it, and enjoy the glory of it."(Rob Lockett)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Morals exist, just not in an absolute sense. So, morals absolutely do not exist in an absolute state? Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Morality is not an imposition, unless 'being' is an imposition.
I guess you could say that being is an imposition. Some people resent that imposition enough to commit suicide. If you were intending your post as a comment on my signature, then you misfired. "Morality" is not the same as "morals". Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
I got that part. But I'm afraid you don't understand moral relativism. If you understood it, you would recognize that christians are moral relativists. Okay, the seventh day adventists are slightly less relative in their morals than other christians, and I hope you see the point I am making with that example. No, I don't see your point. If I had to guess, you are trying to define what I mean by moral relativism.
I sometimes listen to fundies condemning moral relativism, and it is really funny to hear the statements of their own moral relativism mixed in with their condemnation of others. The argument over whether morals are absolute or relative is not to identify which set of beliefs adhere to the absolute standard. That is a matter of speculation. The argument is whether we recognize the necessity of their existence. If you argue that morals are truly relative then you have no reason to argue with my belief that they are absolute. In essence, you have no argument. "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." -2nd Corinthians 10:4-5
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
quote: No difference. quote: Good point. "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." -2nd Corinthians 10:4-5
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5869 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Yes, you are right, and I am wrong. Thank you for disagreeing and proving the point. How can morality not be synonymous with what is right? It need not apply only to social interaction, it applies to all interaction and is indistinguishable from the effect of physical law.
Law is law. Not created, but creating. The law of non-contradiction cannot be challenged without affirming it. And it's not my argument. It owns us, we do not own it. "Disobedience to conscience is voluntary; bad poetry, on the other hand, is usually not made on purpose."(C.S. Lewis A Preface to Paradise Lost)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: How can morality not be synonymous with what is right? It need not apply only to social interaction, it applies to all interaction.... Just out of curiosity: to what interactions other than social interactions does morality apply? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
If I had to guess, you are trying to define what I mean by moral relativism.
Bad guess. What you mean by "moral relativism" does not matter here. You have criticised others based on their statements of moral relativism. That criticism has to be based on what they mean when using that term. Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024