in a relative morality system, if you think it right to enforce your morality onto others, then you're able to do so.
Based on what? You only 'think' it is right, right? So what are you gettng at? Power in numbers? Arguments from authority? Sure they can win a battle, but so can a nuclear bomb. It doesn't mean you actually were the 'better man'. It's either a fair fight, or a no contest.
you do value your life, right? then I suggest fighting for your life. it's your morality that you have to follow. it's the other guy's morality that brought him to your door. (well, not necessarily . . .).
Exactly. You are invoking an objective here. "It is not necessarily morality that brought him to the door". But if he feels good about being there, how can you say he is wrong?
So, should I hold onto my illusionary belief of absolute morality or will someone here help me find ways to deal with knowing the truth and still not turning "immoral"?
Stop being afraid. Right is right. It is not always the best thing to do to tell the truth when you could save a life by lying, but no matter how many generations pass you will call a person a hero for saving another.
If you don't believe in your own morality, you can't judge anything of the past, you can't learn from mistakes, you can't be a human. You are not always going to be right, neither is anyone else. Something will always be right, and better. Don't get too lost and confused. It will always be foolish to hurt another, someone else will always be hurt by your carelessness.
p.s. since actual invites seem to not work, i'm throwing the chat invite in here (and for a change, it's in a message that actually has something to say that's on-topic!). anywho, would love to chat if you can tonight.
It's not a mess. It doesn't have to be. I will chat only if you say that your morality is objective because it judges other people as 'evil' even if they don't think they are.
If a murderer is trying to kill you, he is wrong. This is because YOU SAY SO. Not because he really is. Therefore you can't judge him. If you will just admit that wrong is wrong, you can be done with your mess.
Ah, nevermind, I am sure I will be up to chat in a few.
Then I suspect you just don't know what moral relativism is. You've already accepted that moral relativism is true. You're reacting to some strawman conception of moral relativism, probably one you got from church.
Moral relativism is simply the recognition that morality depends on the situation. Is it right to steal? No, but what about stealing to feed a starving family? Moral relativism is simply the recognition that moral situations are often complex and nuanced, and simple statements like "thou shalt not steal" fail to encapsulate the proper response to every situation.