View Poll Results: Morality: Relativism vs. Absolutism -- who wins?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Moral Relativism

    11 27.50%
  • Moral Absolutism

    29 72.50%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 24th, 2004 @ 08:47 AM
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Somewhere In U.S. Hypocrisy
    Gender
    Politics
    White Pride & World Peace
    Religion
    Greek Polytheist Ancient Beliefs
    Posts
    43
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    Perhaps I shall refine what I said or try.

    On the matters of life, existence, and death this is what I meant.

    On life I meant that right now you are granted life you are your own entity in the physical realm so right now I could say I live and right now that is absolute.

    On existence right now , in the time and space and a whole bunch of other attributes that too is absolute.

    On death knowing that we as human beings can not live forever knowing that we shall die , meaning death . Death is a absolute thing that occurs in everyones life.

    As for your death is only a title I suppose I could say dreams are a title they don't exist or the sky is only a description but hey the sky doesn't exist.

    Where are you going with this?

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 24th, 2004 @ 08:47 AM
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Somewhere In U.S. Hypocrisy
    Gender
    Politics
    White Pride & World Peace
    Religion
    Greek Polytheist Ancient Beliefs
    Posts
    43
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    For common record death exist and so do the sky and dreams.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    Quote Originally Posted by OraclePhilosophy
    Perhaps I shall refine what I said or try.
    Define all you'd like, language is most interesting

    On the matters of life, existence, and death this is what I meant.

    On life I meant that right now you are granted life you are your own entity in the physical realm so right now I could say I live and right now that is absolute.
    'Granted life' implies a giver. I have yet to see evidence there is a Santa Clause who gives out lives. I am constructed out of various strains of genetic, linguistic, cultural and political affects. There is not even an 'I', merely a bio-chemical flow inside an ever changing skull. And of course, it's only really a skull because we percieve something, forget about some differences, reduce those differences to the same and abstract from this a concept, which we then signify in a mark of writing which looks something like 'skull'.

    On existence right now , in the time and space and a whole bunch of other attributes that too is absolute.
    In what sense is either time or space absolute? Einstein's relativity, quantum mechanics...

    On death knowing that we as human beings can not live forever knowing that we shall die , meaning death. Death is a absolute thing that occurs in everyones life.
    It is the change of the bio-chemical mesh into something else. Not death, only change.

    As for your death is only a title I suppose I could say dreams are a title they don't exist or the sky is only a description but hey the sky doesn't exist.
    Tell me what you mean by the sky. Show it to me. Be sure that we're both seeing exactly the same thing. Describe it to me, and be sure that the words you are using signify the same thing to you that they do to me

    Where are you going with this?
    Everywhere and nowhere
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  4. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 5th, 2006 @ 06:18 AM
    Subrace
    Nordid / slight Alpinid
    Country
    Canada Canada
    Gender
    Politics
    Racial Anthroposophy
    Posts
    15
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    Superior (Man/Nation/Race)
    -Self-Sufficient/Independent: eg: Does not need the latter
    -Creative Intelligence: eg: Creating "something" out of "nothing"
    Inferior (Man/Nation/Race)
    -Always Dependent
    -Manipulative Intelligence: eg: Manipulating what already exists
    God can punish Humanity just by being absent - Devil cannot
    Last edited by Racial Philosopher; Saturday, November 20th, 2004 at 10:27 PM. Reason: Arrangement of words changed as I posted - sorry!

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 24th, 2004 @ 08:47 AM
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Somewhere In U.S. Hypocrisy
    Gender
    Politics
    White Pride & World Peace
    Religion
    Greek Polytheist Ancient Beliefs
    Posts
    43
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    To Jack The Ripper.


    You said in death there is change and not absolute if I am understanding you correctly.

    We are all going to die and with that comes death , that right there is very absolute because there is yet of today no means to conquer death. You said with death there will come change , I am inclined to agree . The problem is what change for noone has come back to tell us of what after death is like or is there even a change at all for that matter.


    In death our bodies wither away and the body decomposes I guess that would consider for physical change however I am more interested in the change of soul.

    You want to know my definition of sky it is that big blue gaze above us neverending around the world. It is between us and space and certain gravity keeps us on the ground. It is that thing with clouds and the sun. Sometimes rain and snow comes down from here.

    That is my thinking of the sky or did your version be somthing else?
    Last edited by OraclePhilosophy; Sunday, November 21st, 2004 at 03:33 AM.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 24th, 2004 @ 08:47 AM
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Somewhere In U.S. Hypocrisy
    Gender
    Politics
    White Pride & World Peace
    Religion
    Greek Polytheist Ancient Beliefs
    Posts
    43
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    To jack The Ripper , part II



    The I exist thing is I am my own self there for I exist. I think therefore I am.
    There is no two individuals who are the same another interesting thing. You are right we are made of bio-chemicals , and of our own political , social , cultural aspects I do agree.



    On the existence of time and space , yes it is absolute for if it was not nothing would exist now.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    You said in death there is change and not absolute if I am understanding you correctly.
    You understand incorrectly. I meant that death is a label we put place across change itself.


    We are all going to die and with that comes death , that right there is very absolute because there is yet of today no means to conquer death.
    Death is not an existent, it is a designation we use to refer to a stage - a stage which we ourselves arbitrarily delineate and form into a singularity. Christians, and before that, Heathens, believed that death was nothing more than a process in which something we might call 'the soul' transferred from this dimension to another, leaving the corporeal body to decompose. Aristotle termed this De anima, or the animator, aka the soul.

    You said with death there will come change , I am inclined to agree .
    Change simply is. The world we exist in is active becoming. Out of this we reduce the process of becoming to comprehenisble levels via our nervous system - Aldous Huxley writes about this in Doors of Perception - and then designate relatively stable points, and then claim 'these points change'. For example, we see various forms of becoming in what we term a tree - becoming green, becoming brown, becoming larger, etc. and then turn these becomings into entities, like leaves (becoming-green), wood (becoming-brown) and the 'tree' itself (becoming larger). By synthesising these streams of active becoming, we form entities. You subscribe to a conceptual singularity called death, which I dispute and say that it does not exist.

    The problem is what change for noone has come back to tell us of what after death is like or is there even a change at all for that matter.
    Of course there is a change. The biochemical process known as the brain decays and the rest of the body does as well. See Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain by Antonio R. Damasio (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846).

    You want to know my definition of sky it is that big blue gaze above us neverending around the world.
    Does the sky include the moon, the planets, comets etc? At what point do you distinguish the sky from 'outer space'? Given that most people say 'the clouds are in the sky', and clouds are little more than cold, condensed water, and the sky undoubtedly contains doses of moisture, at what point can you say 'the clouds are in the sky' and the 'there are no clouds in the sky'? What is the essence of the cloud that distinguishes it from the sky in which it lies?

    It is between us and space and certain gravity keeps us on the ground.
    There is a massive amount of empty space between the molecules that form your organic processes. Shall we say that you are largely empty space? What is this 'us' and how do we distinguish it from 'space'?

    It is that thing with clouds and the sun. Sometimes rain and snow comes down from here.
    You've mentioned the sky, and then space, and while most would say that the sun is situated in space, and is the nexus of our solar system, you would have it placed with the clouds, from which it is further away than the clouds are from us. Why?

    That is my thinking of the sky or did your version be somthing else?
    I do philosophy

    The I exist thing is I am my own self there for I exist. I think therefore I am.
    How can you think, then, about yourself if you are it? How is self-reflection possible, if this self is a being?

    There is no two individuals who are the same another interesting thing.
    I use the term 'individual' occasionally in place of 'agent'. There are no individual humans as such.

    You are right we are made of bio-chemicals , and of our own political , social , cultural aspects I do agree.
    Of course I am. Except not aspects, because an aspect implies an attribute of a being, and beings do not change.

    On the existence of time and space , yes it is absolute for if it was not nothing would exist now.
    'Time' and 'space' have been experienced differently by different Cultures. Oswald Spengler outlines this quite well in his Decline of the West, Volume 1. In what sense are time and space considered 'absolute'?
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  8. #38
    Member Awar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Last Online
    Saturday, October 22nd, 2005 @ 12:04 AM
    Subrace
    Corded/Balkanoid UP
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Olympus
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Politics
    Nutzi
    Religion
    Agnostic!!!
    Posts
    4,943
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    Anyway, I skipped the long discussion, to tell my view on it.
    If it coincides with someone else's, I'm sorry. If I say something original, I demand copyrights.

    I voted for Moral Relativism. Not because I believe it's the way it should be, or because it's some major guideline in my life. I voted simply because I think this is the way things ( currently ) are.

    Even in an all-natural world, circumstances change, sometimes drastically.
    A human being is not the end-all be-all, there are many other species, probably many other life-forms in the universe(s). What we achieve today, tomorrow may be gone.

    In reality, only we matter to us, so...

    The 'chaos' exists, and from it, man ( we ) appeared. We try to make sense and order, with our chaotic little minds, born also from chaos. With the hope of something better that awaits us, with our view clouded by the unknown storms of the future, we hope for something. Some sort of justice for behaving in a certain way. This changed through the ages, and it will continue to change.

    So, we hope we have some magical formula for morals that will earn us the prize.
    The prize's shape and function change as human understanding changes.
    But, ultimately, we know that we don't know.

    If we set a certain goal for ourselves in the future, then, for a relatively brief period,
    there will exist an absolute moral, but, then after eons, this goal becomes sometimes more distant, sometimes closer, but always out of our grasp.

    We have some of these goals imprinted in our DNA, but, given a long enough time,
    these too change. Self-indulgence through evolution may again turn into a hive-mind,
    and back again to the goal of self-fulfilment.

    The problem with not knowing future in advance is that we never know if perhaps
    the striving for self-fulfillment, or perhaps that of a hive-mind will ultimately destroy our entire species, or perhaps, through some futuristic contraption, destroy or disable all life.

    But, even with knowing future, and knowing how to advance without error, there comes another unknown point. Why all that? Gazing into the future which never ends, with the goal of survival? I'm sure that someone who could see exactly into the future for the next billion years wouldn't have much joy out of life, or perhaps would see no point in just surviving. Or perhaps, it's just our mindset of this eon, and in some future incarnation of humanity ( or life itself ), someone will be able to fully understand infinity.

    That's why I believe that morals are ultimately relative.
    We can just see a short portion of time, through the help of history
    and intelligence we can look a bit into the past, and think a bit ahead,
    but, believing in something absolute ( at least 'more absolute' than a recurring event ),
    is just fooling ourselves. I hope it isn't.

    Perhaps the universe expands from a big-bang, and then after some ( incredibly long to us ) time it shrinks into a pinhead again, and then explodes again, and perhaps it's the goal of life to evolve and become able to go outside this recurring event, or maybe it's the goal of life to evolve and produce a way to cause universe to shrink again into a pinhead, and explode, and thus renew it.

    We'll never really know ( probably ). It's just too grand a scale for our little brains.
    On the other hand, I view nature as a sort of 'temporary morals', something which is the only ( however unstable ) guideline we have ( for the time being )

  9. #39
    Freethinker "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Thorburn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 2nd, 2019 @ 03:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    Europid
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Location
    Midgård
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Politics
    Reason, Freedom, Justice
    Religion
    Truth, Greatness, Beauty
    Posts
    1,381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    89
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    224
    Thanked in
    65 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack The Ripper
    Solipsism?
    Sophism.

    How do you know he's wrong?
    Because observation and reason prove him wrong.

    How is the universe supposed to become conscious of itself?
    Through its self-realization. It is already conscious of itself.

    That's how he learns pain is wrong.
    Unhappiness in general. Glad you cede to my premise.

    Not totalitarianism. Drug him up and deny him freedom of speech and he may be the happiest creature on the planet. See Brave New World by Aldous Huxley.
    Freedom is also not the last criterium of morality. Never claimed otherwise. However, will he be happier on this non-existant drug with or without the right to freedom of speech? With or without the insecurity of being tortured, imprisoned, shot, or deprived of this drug if he says something wrong -- drug-induced or not? Concrete freedom (the one that doesn't violate the freedom of others) potentially only adds happiness, never decreases it, and that's why it should be maximized.

    Alternatively, he'll do what he can to get his kids off drugs, which is what the vast majority of parents in my country do in that situation.
    It's not an alternative. It's a legitimate choice to deal with an issue. Question in this case would merely be what should happen during this effort which typically is long-lasting and frequently subject to failure. This parent would have preferred his child to stay legal, socially integrated, healthy and alive while the issue is tackled, like every reasonable, concerned parent or human being would.

    How can anyone be selfless? A selfless action is the same as a 'disinterested action', correct? So how can you do anything you don't have a direct or indirect interest in?
    Different topic. Surely, your position can be well-argued, but even then there would be different categories of motivation. I used the term in its common understanding, namely making someone else the primary, direct benefactor of an action.

    System immanent? Could you explain this term?
    Where power is not limited, there is a potential of unlimited abuse of power.

    At some point I will have finished reading this. Right now I need to A) save it to my favourites, B) recover from last night's bourbon, C) try remembering that brunette girl's home phone number, D) study because I have to go to Canberra for Officer Selection Board tomorrow
    C, B, A, D -- or what was your priority order?

    Man can do just about anything concievable. Why does he do what he does? What motivates him to pursue happiness?
    Biology.

    Not so much morals as power analysis. From that, plus my triad of will-desire-power I can explain group identity and a variety of other things. Including human action.
    Explain them?

    'The greatest happiness for the greatest number' is the morality of Utilitarianism, last I read. Why not the majority?
    Because net happiness is to be maximized and happiness comes in degrees. It's not about more happiness for the majority. An action that would make 49% of the affected extremely unhappy and 51% insignificantly more happy would be immoral.

    No one's stopping them from using cows or anything else as currency, it just isn't recognised in the courts of the system. Bartering is still legal, that's what currency was derived from - a substance that could be bartered for anything else.
    There is an effective money monopoly of state banks or private banks, depending on the country, enforced by federal and international laws. No competition is possible.
    This is a placeholder for a signature.

  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 24th, 2004 @ 08:47 AM
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Somewhere In U.S. Hypocrisy
    Gender
    Politics
    White Pride & World Peace
    Religion
    Greek Polytheist Ancient Beliefs
    Posts
    43
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: Moral Relativism vs. Absolutism

    To Jack The Ripper


    To whether death is a label of change it is sill absolute for we all shall expirience it.

    On the basis of death it is a existent for we see the existence of it every day call it change call it what you will it exist.

    Jack The Ripper- You subscribe to a conceptual singularity called death, which I dispute and say does not exist.

    I ask you why?


    You discussed the changes of the body through death my comment on we do not know what death is for noone has come back to tell was merely my thinking of the soul and not the body. I know how the body decomposes and it's physical change , I am however much more interested in the change of the soul and inner being .

    I should of rephrased that better sorry.


    I distinguish the sky from what I see in it , and later when I referred to the sun I merely was meaning I see it through the sky . The sun in reality is in outer space. I tend to describe such things I see.

    To get technical the sky is the atmosphere in which gravity dwells that is the seperation of atmosphere and space. Clouds being formed by the this same atmosphere as well. The sun being out of the Earth's atmosphere in space as we all know.

    When I was talking of the sky I was merely describing from a visual perspective not in technical terms that you replied me in.

    Does the sky include the moon, comets ect? - Jack the Ripper

    I say no because those are outside of the atomosphere this is probally a question of the sun comment I made and again I shall say I was merely making a visual non technical description.


    What is the essence of the cloud that distinguishes it from the sky in which it lies? - Jack the Ripper


    I would say basically sky is a crude way of saying atmosphere in which clouds are part of the atmosphere and is in it and that is their essence.


    What is this us and how do we distinguish it from space- Jack the Ripper

    The us is humankind and life itself on earth with certain gravity elements we stay on the ground , common physics what goes up must go down. That is gravity which keeps us down seperates the atmosphere from space.

    On my discussion of the self I exist think, walk, talk and breathe I am my own individual , there are those who would make a case against individuality and yet in psychology everyone knows every person has their own behavioral traits. If people have their own behavioral traits and Individuality just another trait of behavior why debate this?


    My own quote: On the existence of time and space, yes it is absolute for if it was not nothing would exist now.

    Jack The Ripper- Time and space have been expirienced differently by different cultures . Oswald Spengler outlines this quite well in his decline of the west, Volume 1. In what sense are time and space considered ' absolute'.?

    On what I was saying was beyond culture I was talking of universal principles existence as a whole. The universe is absolute in this cosmo and to the next and time is eternity.

    I am sorry I am terrible at explaining things I am new to this Skadi forum in which since I have been here I like very much , you must forgive I don't talk much to anybody and what I have to think usually floats around in my head to myself.

    In knowing this know it is hard for me talking to others , me and my non-social self .

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Thursday, December 1st, 2016, 01:14 AM
  2. Does Ethnoculturalism Lead To Ethical Relativism?
    By Bernhard in forum Law, Ethics, & Morals
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012, 07:38 AM
  3. Monarchy: Hobbes/Absolutism vs Locke/checks and balances
    By Abby Normal in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Thursday, June 3rd, 2004, 06:39 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •