I liked this - I'm one for being there are no absolutes in reality. The terrorist can be a saviour and warrior in his home country, the psychopath that experiments on and kills homeless people can also be seen as a revolutionary in modern medicine, and so, so many other things!
There are no absolutes, ever.
I may podcast about this in my matrix podcast :)
Does this make me your muse?
This is all so sudden!
I think there may be a few moral absolutes...although for everything I can come up with, I think I can find an alternate way of viewing it. There must be some though, surely?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Are you absolutely sure?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well, if you want to home in on this particular aspect of the debate...see the chat below where we are debating this very point...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As I asked previously - can you name a universal absolute? :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As I answered below: genocide is wrong. The fact that some people have committed it does not change this, Ray. Is there a reasonable ethical or moral argument that can justify genocide? I can't think of one.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The question wasn't aimed at you!
But in reality - genocide is only wrong in the eye of some people; which is subjective also, but it's not absolute.
Ask some white people from the KKK if they think African Americans should be extinct :P
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes, but Ray, you could make the argument that rape and paedophilia are okay (not that you would think that!) based on that logic! I think we may be having a semantic argument here. What I see as absolute, you don't!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Oh personally I definitely have absolutes. All of my morals are absolute. I'm looking at it in the wider perspective - as if I was a pinprick in a massive haystack (which we are in essence)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, I am still not seeming to convey what I mean!
What you, I, or anyone else may think morally isn't terribly relevant. What I mean by a "moral absolute" is a "rule" that cannot be reasonably challenged from an ethical or moral perspective. By anyone.
Returning to genocide - I cannot see such an angle that someone (absolutely anyone!) could reasonably posit to suggest that genocide is morally acceptable. I don't care what the KKK or Hitler might say - their position is not reasonable.
If one could come up with a scenario where one million people had to be sacrificed to save ten million people, then this would qualify as a reasonable ethical justification. I cannot see this scenario existing though!
So my position is that genocide not being acceptable is a moral absolute. There is no reasonable justification to advocate genocide.
Paedophilia and rape are the same. Killing, not so much! There are definite grey areas, here...
I think that sums it up, the grey area thing. Most things are a shade of grey. A few things are not.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In our world yes. Not in places where Genocide is a natural occurrence within society every decade or so. I get what you mean. I really do.
But who are you to deem what's reasonable? Are you now the scales of justice that we need to abide by? It's like when the US and UK get involved in matters they shouldn't. Why do we think we should? Do we honestly think we have any moral high ground ourselves to pass judgement on another culture?
Personally, I see genocide as a very bad, nasty thing that needs to stop. But how can I sit there and say that I am right and they are wrong.
Who says I am right and they are wrong?
If the Earth inhabits 50 black people, 30 white people and 20 mixed race people. All of a sudden then 50 black people eliminate the 30 white people.
Is it wrong? Who is reasonable?
I don't believe in a God that passes out morals just for the icing on the cake. I only believe in people and their actions.
So who decides that scenario is wrong? You? Me? Whomever? What if the Black and Asian communities rejoiced at the killing? No-one would see it as wrong - so would it be wrong?
I see the world as all shades of grey lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit