Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 22, 2022, 4:29 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Any Moral Relativists in the House?
#31
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 11:57 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The conclusion provided may be a nonseq, but I think it misrepresents relativism.  It's not a relativist argument so much as the statement that descriptive relativism is true followed by the conclusion that relativism is not objectivism, therefore subjectivism, imo.  

To be fair to cultural relativism we should probably respect the distinction between the opinions of a subject and facts of a culture in which that subject resides, and acknowledge that objectivism, relativism and subjectivism all make assertions to truth-in-general, that a moral claim can be true or false and at least some are.

I'm sure there are more refined theories out there. I'm not opposed to giving them a looking over.

But (if I'm being honest) that was more or less the argument that sold me on relativism years ago. And I'm sure others have reached the conclusion based on that premise. So Rachels is right to address it. Before that passage, he does present relativism quite charatably. And that was only his first argument.
Reply
#32
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
That's interesting, because..if the conclusion were true, then cultural relativism would be false. There's no way to get to the position that there is no objective truth in morality* or that morality is a matter of opinions from cultural relativism.

It's not really an issue of refined positions or more refined positions. Cultural relativism asserts that moral facts are objectively true of cultures rather than objects or subjects. That something about my culture is why eating puppies is bad, not something about eating puppies or my opinion of eating puppies.

*frankly, I think this one is doing alot of the work - it's a subtle equivocation silently presenting an appeal to undesirable consequences - so what if a moral truth doesn't refer to the specific parameters a person may prefer - that won't make the assertion any more or less accurate
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#33
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 2:25 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: That's interesting, because..if the conclusion were true, then cultural relativism would be false.  There's no way to get to the position that there is no objective truth in morality* or that morality is a matter of opinions from cultural relativism.

What conclusion?
Reply
#34
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
-any of these no 2s

Quote:1. The Greeks believed it was wrong to eat the dead, whereas the
Callatians believed it was right to eat the dead.
2. Therefore, eating the dead is neither objectively fight nor objectively
wrong. It is merely a matter of opinion, which varies from culture to
culture.

Or, alternatively:
1. The Eskimos see nothing wrong with infanticide, whereas Americans
believe infanticide is immoral.
2. Therefore, infanticide is neither objectively right nor objectively
wrong. It is merely a matter of opinion, which varies from culture to
culture.

Clearly, these arguments are variations of one fundamental idea They are both
special cases of a more general argument, which says:

1. Different cultures have different moral codes.
2. Therefore, there is no objective “truth” in morality. Right and wrong
are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.

It doesn't follow - but it's also not relativism.  What would follow, and actually be relativism, would be something like

1. Different cultures have different moral codes
2. Therefore, the true set of moral assertions varies from culture to culture.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#35
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 11:29 am)brewer Wrote: Anybody else uncomfortable with the terms 'fact' and 'moral' being tied together?

Seems to me that all descriptive terms for moral philosophical positions fall under the term relative,.......... maybe excluding objective. They all fall somewhere of a moral sliding scale.

That's about as philosophical as I want to get. Dodgy

You should be uncomfortable. Skepticism is warranted. Anyone who claims that there are (or may be) "moral facts" needs to explain themselves. And I'll tell you right now: no matter what their position is concerning moral facts, it will be unsatisfying in some way.

Respecting that you may have just wanted to say your piece and move on... without getting dragged into a philosophical debate.... I don't wanna make you hear a bunch of shit you aren't interested in. In which case, just don't click the box:


Reply
#36
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
[Image: 7775EFFD-5E1A-4509-A28A-87A0CE54DD79.jpe...00&dpr=1.5]
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#37
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 2:58 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: It doesn't follow - but it's also not relativism.  What would follow, and actually be relativism, would be something like

1. Different cultures have different moral codes
2. Therefore, the true set of moral assertions varies from culture to culture.

That doesn't follow unless you take the word "true" out.
Reply
#38
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 3:02 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:
(May 25, 2021 at 11:29 am)brewer Wrote: Anybody else uncomfortable with the terms 'fact' and 'moral' being tied together?

Seems to me that all descriptive terms for moral philosophical positions fall under the term relative,.......... maybe excluding objective. They all fall somewhere of a moral sliding scale.

That's about as philosophical as I want to get. Dodgy

You should be uncomfortable. Skepticism is warranted. Anyone who claims that there are (or may be) "moral facts" needs to explain themselves. And I'll tell you right now: no matter what their position is concerning moral facts, it will be unsatisfying in some way.

You know, it's not the nihilist who suffers anxiety so much as those around him who are trying to grapple with their incredulity and revulsion concerning his nihilism.
[Image: Fenrir-sign.jpg]
Reply
#39
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
2 follows so plainly..that it might simply be a restatement of number 1. Bachelors exist, therefore there are unmarried men. Consider that the true set of solutions to a given math problem also varies from base to base.

The difference between the three broad positions we've been discussing is not whether or not some assertion is true, but what it's true of. Since you mentioned Boghossian earlier, I believe he had some comments on this. Hidden parameters?

found

I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#40
RE: Any Moral Relativists in the House?
(May 25, 2021 at 3:02 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:
(May 25, 2021 at 11:29 am)brewer Wrote: Anybody else uncomfortable with the terms 'fact' and 'moral' being tied together?

Seems to me that all descriptive terms for moral philosophical positions fall under the term relative,.......... maybe excluding objective. They all fall somewhere of a moral sliding scale.

That's about as philosophical as I want to get. Dodgy

You should be uncomfortable. Skepticism is warranted. Anyone who claims that there are (or may be) "moral facts" needs to explain themselves. And I'll tell you right now: no matter what their position is concerning moral facts, it will be unsatisfying in some way.

Respecting that you may have just wanted to say your piece and move on... without getting dragged into a philosophical debate.... I don't wanna make you hear a bunch of shit you aren't interested in. In which case, just don't click the box:



The box was relatively moral. 8 out of 10 on my sliding scale. Hehe
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem




Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  On theism, why do humans have moral duties even if there are objective moral values? Pnerd 33 369 9 minutes ago
Last Post: Pnerd
  Maximizing Moral Virtue h311inac311 41 565 May 20, 2022 at 12:52 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Can we trust our Moral Intuitions? vulcanlogician 72 1828 November 7, 2021 at 1:25 pm
Last Post: Alan V
  [Serious] Moral Obligations toward Possible Worlds Neo-Scholastic 93 2796 May 23, 2021 at 1:43 am
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  A Moral Reality Acrobat 29 1967 September 12, 2019 at 8:09 pm
Last Post: brewer
  In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order Acrobat 84 4528 August 30, 2019 at 3:02 pm
Last Post: LastPoet
  Moral Oughts Acrobat 109 4653 August 30, 2019 at 4:24 am
Last Post: Acrobat
  Is Moral Nihilism a Morality? vulcanlogician 140 4926 July 17, 2019 at 11:50 am
Last Post: DLJ
  [Serious] An Argument Against Hedonistic Moral Realism SenseMaker007 25 1843 June 19, 2019 at 7:21 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Is Moral Responsibility Compatible With Determinism? mcc1789 44 3233 June 11, 2019 at 1:34 pm
Last Post: SenseMaker007



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)