Moral Relativism states that there are no absolute truths, for example whatever is right for you might not be right for me. This violates the law of non-contradiction. By saying there are no absolute truths, the statement itself is claiming to be an absolute truth. There is truth out there and it comes from the word of God through Jesus. What say you?
2006-08-18 18:20:59 · 18 answers · asked by daniel 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Several other people have given good answers. I really doubt you can list a set of moral absolutes that are complete and consistent. People who believe that morals can be spelled out in pure black and white terms are not really thinking through the consequences of that belief.
It is especially bad when Christians say that "the Bible is the source of the moral absolutes." The Bible is wildly inconsistent about morals. "Thou shalt not kill" on the one hand, but "kill in the name of God" on the other hand.
I've heard some Christians say that Christ made a new covenant that voided some of the laws in the Old Testament. But exactly which laws are voided under this new covenant are not spelled out, and lots of Christians seem to feel free to pick and choose. The Old Testament gives conditions under which you should sell your daughter into slavery, or kill someone by stoning them to death. We no longer think those are correct morals, but many Christians are quick to use some passages from the same book (Leviticus) to say that homosexuality is wrong. This kind of picking and choosing is very unethical behavior in my opinion.
2006-08-18 18:51:50 · answer #1 · answered by Jim L 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OK Here is a little quiz. Does the bible state that God is spirit? Yes and this is an absolute truth. Do you believe that God is spirit? Here is a relative truth. And you to know the difference.
Truth here is a logical term from a two value Aristotelian system. It is not the truth that Pilate asked Jesus for. I am always amazed that someone who phrase a Christian question about a subject that Jesus never gave an answer to.
So here is a word study in the Gospel of John that talks about how Jesus dealt with belief, believe, believer and non believer. It is faith/believing (two English words for one Greek word--active voice).
One last point, the bible is the word of God as spoken by the prophets. Jesus (who name means God helps/saves/delivers) is the Jewish messiah. Check Acts to see if he is really the last prophet?
2006-08-18 18:41:40 · answer #2 · answered by J. 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
> "i do not position self belief in moral relativism because morality is derived from value of suffering as a outcome of an action" i don't believe of you could help that assumption. If I scouse borrow the existence mark downs of a few previous biddy who wasn't utilising it besides, and donate a large component to an orphanage, then my action actual makes extra human beings extra constructive off. Does that make it so obviously moral that you'll declare this is moral in an absolute experience? Or is there room for conflict of words in accordance to different definitions of what's moral and what's not? in my view, i imagine the point of morality is to enable us assume less than what circumstances a given individual will take or damage. This in turn enables us to type contracts and coalitions. So any moral precepts that allow those predictions will artwork. yet when i understand you're a Utilitarian, who considers any act moral see you later because the full ensuing suffering isn't higher as a outcome, i'd be a lot less probably to enter a contractual affiliation with you, because i understand you'd be prepared to interrupt that settlement if the most suitable stability of suffering were favorable.
2016-11-30 19:30:01 · answer #3 · answered by newport 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't violate noncontradiction anymore than general relativity does (i.e., not at all).
If there are absolute truths, we probably can't prove it even if we are able to ascertain them. The best we can do is to note that all known observations result in the same conclusion. We are trapped in a world of induction without escape.
It would be a fun game for you to list your 'absolute' morals, and then see if in fact there are exceptions to them.
Is is permissible to murder? What about if you take an action that you know is extremely likely/certain to result in the death of innocent people but it's done as an act of war. Why is that murder permitted? Note that the Bible does NOT give general approval of murder during war, but instead, gave approval of murder only in specific wars of the past. What is your Biblical justification for the bombs dropped on Japan in WWII?
You are very likely a hypocrite who claims absolute standards exist, and then will make exceptions to them left and right, just like almost all other moral absolutist hypocrites.
2006-08-18 18:33:40 · answer #4 · answered by lenny 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
One of your BS commandment states:
Thou shall not kill.
Is that an absolute truth? Then why do we have a death penalty? Why do most Christ Cultists support a death penalty?
This sounds like Moral relativism to me.
When human actions are concerned, there is only one absolute truth. You will die. The rest is relative.
2006-08-18 18:29:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
every one has a different prospective on life
since no two people have lived in exactly the same way
no two people can truely believe in something the same way
we are all influenced by our experiences
what i hold as irrefutably true you could see as besmurching what you hold true
the only absolute truth that i can think of is that truth is relative to the person defining it
2006-08-18 18:32:25 · answer #6 · answered by Alrin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What you are saying is that there is no truth except that contained in the Bible. Since the Bible is easily proved in error, full of contradictions and fairy tales, I find it interesting that you would choose it when looking for truth. Truth is truth, 2000 year old myths will not change that.
2006-08-18 18:29:24 · answer #7 · answered by Paul S 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why should it come only from Jesus? Why can't it be Krishna or Rama or Buddha or Mohamed or Zarathustra or one of the others? Thus what you believe is the truth is not the truth for someone else.
2006-08-18 18:29:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Believing you are right all the time is a sign of a serious mental problem called Egotistical Narcissism. Egomaniacs suffer from a case of wanting to be right all the time, selfishness, childish behavior, immaturity, and underhanded acts when they cant get thier way.
2006-08-18 18:31:17 · answer #9 · answered by brianna_the_angel777 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course there is truth "out there", but it definitely doesn't come from god or Jesus.
2006-08-18 18:28:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋