"rule of thumb" moral relativism
Posted: 25 December 2010 04:29 AM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2010-02-08

I favor moral relativism as a general “rule of thumb” ... but i am opposed to making it a universal absolute—except for possibly in some deep and abstract way, below the level of basic human values, below, maybe, even, the basic tendency of life to develop values which promote more life.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2010 07:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

sorry, profile confusion.  This is me, same guy.  I intend to use the Isaac profile, not the essah one.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2010 07:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15405
Joined  2006-02-14

OK, since we’re only allowed one profile per person here, I’ve gone ahead and banned essah.

This thread belongs in the Philosophy folder so I’ve moved it there as well. Welcome to the Forum.

Cheers,

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2010 08:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  731
Joined  2007-06-20
essah - 25 December 2010 04:29 AM

I favor moral relativism as a general “rule of thumb” ... but i am opposed to making it a universal absolute—except for possibly in some deep and abstract way, below the level of basic human values, below, maybe, even, the basic tendency of life to develop values which promote more life.

Relativism is a meta-ethical claim, is it not, rather than a prescriptive one?

EDIT: I see now there is such a thing as normative (prescriptive) moral relativism. Strange view. Does anyone really promote or hold it?

[ Edited: 25 December 2010 09:58 AM by the PC apeman ]
 Signature 

PC

Profile