Moral Relativism

quote:

---

They are absolute in that we affirm that they are 'good' in and of themselves.

---

How exactly would we go about doing that?

OK.What has that got to do with moral relatavism, except that
it is an example of such?Sarcasm aside, the number of words in a post is not a good
measure of substance

Peter and Dan,Evidently your definition of 'relativism' is that everyone affirms his or her own morality and is responsible for his or her own actions. In that case, I am a relativist, so is everyone else, and there is no other reasonable view.Evidently your definition of 'absolute' is a virtue that is floating in the Plato galaxy, where we can see it with our moral telescopes and are powerless to deny its existence and universality. In that case, there are no absolutes and there is no other reasonable view.However we define our terms, I believe we make conscious moral choices for which we are responsible. We make these choices not on the authority of God or government, but because we recognize that certain virtues are ends in and of themselves. We decide which are relevant in the context of our situations and how to apply them. We decide how our actions will best accomplish the ideal we strive to realize.------------------
Quien busca, halla

Oh.Well, sure. Then I'm with you on that.

quote:

---

Evidently your definition of 'relativism' is that everyone affirms his or her own morality and is responsible for his or her own actions. In that case, I am a relativist, so is everyone else, and there is no other reasonable view.

​

Evidently your definition of 'absolute' is a virtue that is floating in the Plato galaxy, where we can see it with our moral telescopes and are powerless to deny its existence and universality. In that case, there are no absolutes and there is no other reasonable view.

---

Yes, that's exactly what we've been saying ... but we didn't need
to use all that verbiage.

quote:

---

We make these choices not on the authority of God or government, but because we recognize that certain virtues are ends in and of themselves.

---

What a load of [insert derrogatory indication of choice].People do things. They do not sit and ponder the rights and
wrongs of their actions, they have formed over time a level
of acceptability for different types of actions.Few people do things to be virtuos (not even religous people),
they do things because things need doing, and some people are
willing to trample over anyone else to get what they want.Some people will lie, steal, kill, etc. they don't necesarily beleive
that they are wrong to do so, nor do they consider these actions
from a moral PoV (consciously).Some people, whne undercharged in a shop, will walk out going
never-mind they should be more careful, while others will rush
back and point out the error, and still others will chuckle
and pat the extra money in their pocket.But they don't think of the moral implications.

schraf...why did you misquote me? Here's what actually transpired:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Are you actually saying that it's the same thing to cut off the foreskin as it is to remove the clitoris and/or sew up the vagina?

---

​

Yes.

​

By the way, not all female circumcision is infibulation.

---

One wonders why you felt the need to distort what I said.Not only have you distorted the general substance of what I said, you have distorted the greater meaning as well.Indeed, from a physical point of view, removing the foreskin of the penis is not equivalent to removing the clitoris. But not all examples of female circumcision is infibulation. Many are the physical equivalent of the typical male circumcision: Removal of the clitoral hood.It is, however, morally equivalent: You do not have the right to hack off parts of my body.Yes, a parent has the obligation to look out for the welfare of a child and thus, if a child needs an operation to remove a tumor or face death, then the parents would be required to get the operation for the child.I fail to see how this compares to removal of a sexual organ.Every single reason that has been given for the removal of the clitoris is also used to justify removal of the foreskin. If it isn't legitimate to do so to girls, then it isn't legitimate to do it to boys.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

quote:

---

People do things. They do not sit and ponder the rights and
wrongs of their actions, they have formed over time a level
of acceptability for different types of actions.

​

Few people do things to be virtuos (not even religous people),
they do things because things need doing, and some people are
willing to trample over anyone else to get what they want.

---

Remind me not to play cards at Peter's house.If someone sees their own self-interest is an end in itself, then that's the ideal toward which their actions will strive. All I'm saying is that whatever ideals people affirm become the standards for their behavior, whether we share these ideals with them or not.

quote:

---

Some people will lie, steal, kill, etc. they don't necesarily beleive that they are wrong to do so, nor do they consider these actions from a moral PoV (consciously).

---

We all look at these things from some sort of moral perspective, though some perspectives are obviously more humane than others. Doesn't everyone have an ideal for which they would commit extreme acts? Say self-defense?------------------
Quien busca, halla

Look, I AGREE WITH YOU, but I suppose you were too busy looking to "rail against" to notice.If you would come down off of your self-righteous soapbox for just a second, perhaps you would think before chastising a supporter.(jerk)

quote:

---

If someone sees their own self-interest is an end in itself, then that's the ideal toward which their actions will strive. All I'm saying is that whatever ideals people affirm become the standards for their behavior, whether we share these ideals with them or not.

---

OK, but I don't beleive that the affirmation is conscious (in all
cases).

quote:

---

We all look at these things from some sort of moral perspective, though some perspectives are obviously more humane than others. Doesn't everyone have an ideal for which they would commit extreme acts? Say self-defense?

---

Mentioning 'humane' and 'extreme act' throws even more subjectivism
into the mixture.If one considers one's actions in terms of acceptability
or 'right/wrong' then I'd agree that one is operating from
a moral perspective -- what I am saying is by-and-large
that is not how people perceive what they do. The majority
of people are much more self-serving than that.

schrafinator responds to me:

quote:

---

Look, I AGREE WITH YOU, but I suppose you were too busy looking to "rail against" to notice.

---

No, I did notice. But given the tremendous chip on your shoulder, I couldn't help but see the glimmers of "But women have it worse!" in your statement. In other words, you agree that male circumcision is unnecessary, but somehow the implications of female circumcision are worse and are thus more worthy of outrage.

quote:

---

If you would come down off of your self-righteous soapbox for just a second, perhaps you would think before chastising a supporter.

---

If you would get over yourself and realize that you are not the end-all/be-all of discourse for just a moment, perhaps you would think before opening your mouth.If you agreed, then you should have just agreed. But no, you did more than that. You made a value judgement and tried to make it look like I was an idiot who didn't understand that removal of the entire clitoris is not the physical equivalent of removal of the foreskin ("See! Female circumcision is worse!")You misquoted me, schraf. The words you are looking for are, "Oops. I'm sorry. I'll try not to let it happen again." But I am not so naive as to think I'll ever hear you say that.

quote:

---

(jerk)

---

Fool.Now that we have the ad hominem commentary out of the way, perhaps you should just refrain from responding to me. You can't seem to handle it.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

quote:

---

No, I did notice. But given the tremendous chip on your shoulder,

---

You are projecting.

quote:

---

If you would get over yourself and realize that you are not the end-all/be-all of discourse for just a moment, perhaps you would think before opening your mouth.

---

Projecting again, dearie.

quote:

---

If you agreed, then you should have just agreed. But no, you did more than that.

---

...and it's the END OF THE WORLD, a FEDERAL CASE, and a CAPITAL OFFENSE all rolled into one, too!

quote:

---

You made a value judgement and tried to make it look like I was an idiot

---

Actually, you are doing a fine job of that all by yourself right now.

quote:

---

who didn't understand that removal of the entire clitoris is not the physical equivalent of removal of the foreskin ("See! Female circumcision is worse!")

---

It couldn't be that I was simply disagreeing with a small part of your claim.Nope, could never be that.

quote:

---

You misquoted me, schraf.

---

...yet another CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY for which I should be burned at the stake, I know. What a wretched, wretched excuse for a human being I am!

quote:

---

The words you are looking for are, "Oops. I'm sorry. I'll try not to let it happen again." But I am not so naive as to think I'll ever hear you say that.

---

You are projecting, yet again!I have apologized several times to various people in this forum. I dare say I have never seen you do so, not even once. I think you owe Scott an apology wrt the rant you attacked him with in the "homosexual marriage" thread, for example.I have corrected mistakes I have made, as well, many times.I certainly shouldn't have called you a jerk.This isn't the free for all, so I can't call you what I'd like to.Seems to me that I get along fine with pretty much all the reasonable people on this forum. At any rate, I haven't had many complaints.I don't think you can say the same, though, can you?Start taking your meds again, dude. You are starting to get wacky.

quote:

---

perhaps you should just refrain from responding to me. You can't seem to handle it.

---

Eeeeew, I smell insecurity thinly veiled by arrogance!...not that I don't think you are a smart guy, you know, but you do have some issues.[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 07-24-2003][This message has been edited by schrafinator, 07-24-2003]

What would Miss Manners say?------------------
--Percy
   EvC Forum Administrator

I know, I know.I'm done.

Percy, were you just sitting there waiting for me to reply, or what?

quote:

---

schraf...why did you misquote me?

---

I didn't.Someone asked you a "yes or no" question, and you answered. I disagreed with your view, so I replied.quote: Are you actually saying that it's the same thing to cut off the foreskin as it is to remove the clitoris and/or sew up the vagina?

​

Yes.

​

By the way, not all female circumcision is infibulation.

quote:

---

One wonders why you felt the need to distort what I said.

---

By answering "yes" to the question, you are saying, "Yes, it's the same thing to cut off the foreskin as it is to remove the clitoris and/or sew up the vagina."Your following comment, "By the way, not all female circumcision is infibulation." is irrelevant to the question, because clearly, the question referred to infibulation, and asked if you felt that it was equivalent to the cutting off of the foreskin.