The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
GE Morton
Posts: 544
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by GE Morton » March 20th, 2019, 2:13 pm

Belindi wrote:
March 20th, 2019, 11:24 am
A society is not a society unless there is a working consensus of what the members of it ought to do.
Of course it is. A "society" is merely a group of people so situated as to be able to interact, and who do interact at least occasionally. A casual glance around any modern civil society will tell you that there is nothing approaching a consensus as to "what members ought to do." Some people are Christians, some are Muslims, some are satanists, some are atheists --- all of whom have different ideas about what people ought to do. Some people are monogamists, others are polygamists. Some are fascists, others are socialists. Some are inventors, some are thieves. Some people are pediatricians, others are pedophiles. But they're all members of the society.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3374
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by LuckyR » March 20th, 2019, 6:03 pm

GE Morton wrote:
March 20th, 2019, 10:39 am
Belindi wrote:
March 20th, 2019, 5:47 am

Morality of any collective originates in social consensus even when that social consensus is created by the rulers.
Groups don't have moralities, Belindi. Only moral agents do. It is true, of course, that the private moralities of many people are absorbed, with little analysis or reflection, from their personal social circles (parents, teachers, friends, etc). It is also true that people with similar or at least compatible moralities may join together to practice and promote their views. They would be collectives. But modern civil societies are not collectives.
No but they have ethical standards.
"As usual... it depends."

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1942
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by Belindi » March 21st, 2019, 5:32 am

There is dynamic tension between personal morality and collective morality which can result in social cohesion. Social cohesion is often taken to be unadulterated good. However a high level of social cohesion leads to insularity or nationalism. Modern times are plagued by dissolution of social cohesion, which is sometimes called low moral standards. Many individuals feel uncomfortable loss of identity as social cohesion is reduced, and nationalism , even extreme 'blood and soil ' morality , is a growing response to anomie (Durkheim).

User avatar
Eddie Larry
New Trial Member
Posts: 8
Joined: September 10th, 2018, 7:20 pm

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by Eddie Larry » March 23rd, 2019, 10:08 am

It is a shame that humanity has not really accepted relativity as the basis of human thinking until Einstein early in the 1900’s. All truth functional statements are the statements of a person. We call this person a subject. That is where we get the term subjectivity. The is no exit from this fact. Our beliefs about morality or science, objective facts, are the beliefs of persons, of subjects.

That said, subjects have an interest in their beliefs and try to impose them on the world. Some are better at this than others and use persuasion rather than violence. Basically, each individual has an interest in making his or her beliefs absolutes. So the game is on and it has been on for millions of years. It is called evolution.

Relativity thinking allows us a much better handle on what is going on, IMO, of course.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1942
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by Belindi » March 24th, 2019, 5:37 am

Is moral relativism the same as or similar to post modernism?

Yes, it is, in the following important way:

In making decisions it's necessary to compare one option with others. Not to do so would be dangerously and probably pathologically impulsive.
Like post modernism, moral relativism is, or should be a springboard to decision. Nobody can go through life not making any decisions and to try to do so is like imitating a maggot.

User avatar
aveenire
New Trial Member
Posts: 7
Joined: March 21st, 2019, 12:48 pm

Re: Are we forced to accept moral relativism?

Post by aveenire » April 7th, 2019, 1:39 pm

no we are not forced to anything at all. even if we break some traffic laws we are not forced by anyone at all.

Post Reply