Poll

Which do you agree with the most.

Moral nihilism14%14% - 7
Moral absolutism21%21% - 10
Moral relativity63%63% - 30
Total: 47
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5556

Moral absolutism: There are a clear right and wrong regardless of the framework of the situation.
Moral relativity: The framework of a situation such as perspective, culture, etc. define the right and wrong of anything.
Moral nihilism: Because everyone has a different perspective and view there can not be a right and wrong to anything since each view would contradict the others.

Which would you must agree with?
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6513|Texas - Bigger than France
What's the difference between relativity and nihilism?

Seem kind of the same to me.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85

Pug wrote:

What's the difference between relativity and nihilism?

Seem kind of the same to me.
They are the same, except nihilism says that because the world is like that you should go off yourself.
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6496|South Florida

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Pug wrote:

What's the difference between relativity and nihilism?

Seem kind of the same to me.
They are the same, except nihilism says that because the world is like that you should go off yourself.
Lol but innopropriate! Reported.

This is DST flaming, you should know better than that.
15 more years! 15 more years!
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina
Umm...  ok.  I prefer moral relativity.

Granted, I still have a set of morals that adapt to whatever the situation is.
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6513|Texas - Bigger than France
Ahh, Mitch the absolutist.
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6496|South Florida

Pug wrote:

Ahh, Mitch the absolutist.
nah i voted relative.
15 more years! 15 more years!
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6636|NT, like Mick Dundee

Partially relative, partially absolutist.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6193|Escea

Borderline absolutist, relative.
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|6737|UK

Flecco wrote:

Partially relative, partially absolutist.
this tbh
Roger Lesboules
Ah ben tabarnak!
+316|6548|Abitibi-Temiscamingue. Québec!

Turquoise wrote:

Umm...  ok.  I prefer moral relativity.

Granted, I still have a set of morals that adapt to whatever the situation is.
Pretty much sum me too...There is situation where someting that would be bad can be used....like killing someone.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85
You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
chittydog
less busy
+586|6806|Kubra, Damn it!

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
Not really. I think most morals are relative and culturally-based, while there are a few absolutes (don't kill anyone, don't steal their shit).
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6603|949

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
Sure you can, when talking about something like theory and philosophy.  There is no direct right or wrong meaning - words and phrases are just place holders for thoughts, especially regarding moral absolutism and moral relativity.  This isn't math where there are specific outcomes that are truths - philosphy is ever changing.  I can be relatively absolute, or absolutely absolute, or relatively absolutely relative.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
Sure you can, when talking about something like theory and philosophy.  There is no direct right or wrong meaning - words and phrases are just place holders for thoughts, especially regarding moral absolutism and moral relativity.  This isn't math where there are specific outcomes that are truths - philosphy is ever changing.  I can be relatively absolute, or absolutely absolute, or relatively absolutely relative.
Words have meaning. You can't stick them together in any combination and claim they do not contradict.

chittydog wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
Not really. I think most morals are relative and culturally-based, while there are a few absolutes (don't kill anyone, don't steal their shit).
How can you justify absolute morals when you concede that morality is relative to cultures or situations?
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6603|949

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You can't be both relative and absolute. They are mutually exclusive.
Sure you can, when talking about something like theory and philosophy.  There is no direct right or wrong meaning - words and phrases are just place holders for thoughts, especially regarding moral absolutism and moral relativity.  This isn't math where there are specific outcomes that are truths - philosphy is ever changing.  I can be relatively absolute, or absolutely absolute, or relatively absolutely relative.
Words have meaning. You can't stick them together in any combination and claim they do not contradict.
I just did bub.  Prove me wrong you absolutist thought nazi.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85
You have to define those terms first. If I say they don't have any meaning, they don't unless you prove otherwise. Burden of proof is on you bub.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6622|USA
moral relativity.

I do not care what other cultures hold as moral. In the US, there is an accepted morality. Come here and adapt to it, just like you would expect me to do if I moved to another country.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6603|949

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You have to define those terms first. If I say they don't have any meaning, they don't unless you prove otherwise. Burden of proof is on you bub.
But you said they do have meaning.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You have to define those terms first. If I say they don't have any meaning, they don't unless you prove otherwise. Burden of proof is on you bub.
But you said they do have meaning.
Words have meaning - your combination of words have none.
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

How can you justify absolute morals when you concede that morality is relative to cultures or situations?
Did you even read what he wrote?
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6645|Canberra, AUS
R leaning to A
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6603|949

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You have to define those terms first. If I say they don't have any meaning, they don't unless you prove otherwise. Burden of proof is on you bub.
But you said they do have meaning.
Words have meaning - your combination of words have none.
Aww don't make me work

"moral absolutism" - nothing is absolute.  You can claim to have some sort of set in stone rightandwrong-ometer, but no matter what you are basing your pseudo-concrete absolutism on experience, patterns; relativity.

"Moral Relativity" - you have a certain moral compass - your preexisting notions of what is right and wrong (your preconceived moral absolutism of what is right and wrong before each instance of judging something as right or wrong) that gives you perspective.

I am trying to demonstrate the futility of ascribing a position to yourself regarding something that is almost innately out of your control; just having fun with an idea, interesting philosophical nonsense.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6677|67.222.138.85

nukchebi0 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

How can you justify absolute morals when you concede that morality is relative to cultures or situations?
Did you even read what he wrote?
Yeah I did. How can he claim there are moral absolutes (don't kill, don't steal) when everything else is relative to culture or situation? What makes those absolute and nothing else?
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6592|London, England
oh for fuck sake, I don't know whether to blame myself or you but because your poll choices didn't follow the same pattern as the description in the post I ended up voting the wrong one

screw this, and you all

Anyway there are certain universal values which I think can't really be argued about, I'd say it depends on how far you could argue your set of moral beliefs and that Western liberal moral beliefs are by far the easiest to defend, surely.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard