EDITORIAL: The dangers of moral relativism
http://www.beloitdailynews.com/articles/2008/04/16/editorials/edit01.txt
4/16/2008
"IN AN INTERVIEW with a Catholic broadcast network about the visit to the United States by Pope Benedict XVI, President Bush explained the extraordinary steps he intended to take to welcome the pontiff."
(read moral relativist as anyone who doesn't tote and quote hir bible.)
"there's right and wrong in life, that moral relativism has a danger of undermining the capacity to have more hopeful and free societies."
--GW Bush
Fine words from the man who himself has wronged so many, has made society so much less hopeful, so much less free.
"Free" to what?
"Free" from what?
=K
The problem with moral relativism is the same as moral obsolutism, since
for something to be relative, it must be compared to something else.
How do you know a boundary's moving unless your comparing it to some absolute....
But, then who sets this absolute... Why are yours better, aren't yours
relative to some other set of absolute? Are catholics relativists too, since they've
gone off the map and defined their own world seperate from the modern one.
If its simply a different set of absolute from your own, can it really be called relativism
I think the whole moral relativism is incredibly weak.
It can be ripped to tiny shred by decent orator.
The moment morality becomes a 'set' of anything: laws, principles, whatever, it becomes a problem. I would go so far as to say that there is no such thing as moral relativism, because the most basic "relativity" would be the question whether there even IS such a thing as a moral act, rather than what would constitute a moral or immoral act.
Which makes it all the more of a conumdrum, since I would argue that a workable moral relativism is the best model for society, since it would allow every individual the maximum freedom to live as they please.
So the only real answer then is a minimalist moral absolutism, a core morality that everybody does agree on, even if it is just a single rule that everybody respects and applies. Instead of the 10 Commandments, You'd follow the Golden Rule, for example. That, along with the wisdom to apply it correctly.
So here's my minimalist moral absolutism: To my mind, there really is only one absolute, the right to self-determination, to determine your own destiny without interference by others, or WITH others. And while that may sound simplistic and naive, I truly believe it to apply in all situations.
The floor is open for a debate here ... ;D
~Simone.
Quote from: Keira on April 17, 2008, 03:27:34 AM
But, then who sets this absolute...
Given that we are talking about Ratzinger here, that would be the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith), otherwise known as the Holy Office of the Inquisition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Office_of_the_Inquisition), which Ratzinger used to be the head of.
Quote from: Lisbeth on April 17, 2008, 10:06:05 AM
Quote from: Keira on April 17, 2008, 03:27:34 AM
But, then who sets this absolute...
Given that we are talking about Ratzinger here, that would be the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith), otherwise known as the Holy Office of the Inquisition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Office_of_the_Inquisition), which Ratzinger used to be the head of.
Oh joy. No wonder him and George get on so well. They can burn us heretics, witches and sinful defilers of the flesh together!
Hell, I didn't know the Inquisition even still existed. One would think they might've had their fill of blood and disbanded that atrocity.
~Simone.
Quote from: lady amarant on April 17, 2008, 10:45:37 AM
Quote from: Lisbeth on April 17, 2008, 10:06:05 AM
Quote from: Keira on April 17, 2008, 03:27:34 AM
But, then who sets this absolute...
Given that we are talking about Ratzinger here, that would be the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith), otherwise known as the Holy Office of the Inquisition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Office_of_the_Inquisition), which Ratzinger used to be the head of.
Oh joy. No wonder him and George get on so well. They can burn us heretics, witches and sinful defilers of the flesh together!
Hell, I didn't know the Inquisition even still existed. One would think they might've had their fill of blood and disbanded that atrocity.
~Simone.
"In office, Ratzinger fulfilled his institutional role, defending and reaffirming Catholic doctrine, including teaching on topics such as birth control, homosexuality, and inter-religious dialogue."
Pope Benedict XVI: Pre-papal career: Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1981–2005) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI#Prefect_of_the_Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith_.281981.E2.80.932005.29)
QuoteDon't follow leaders
B. Dylan
Quote from: Rebis on April 17, 2008, 03:25:28 PM
QuoteDon't follow leaders
B. Dylan
"watch out for parking meters"
"and the pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
;D
"Get sick, get well
hang around an ink well"
My morals are relative to the mood I am in at the time they rear their ugly little heads.
I wish I were stronger. Like Bounty.