Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,077 Posts
Relative. Each person has their perceptions of right and wrong. Look at all the different forms of marriage in the world for an example of this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,437 Posts
Personal morality stems from the brain, which gathers its values from two sources: your emotional reactions (pain is bad), and your instinctual needs (love is good). One could argue that there is a "universal" morality in the commonly held instinctual needs of the human population, but suggesting that there is some sort of ultimate "good" or "bad" in the universe which we somehow understand and follow implies some kind of spiritual connection to each other.

Answer:
If you are nonreligious, NO
If you are religious, MAYBE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,795 Posts
Everything is relative. There are a lot of "moral" things that the majority of humans will agree on such as killing little innocent kids is bad, but everyone looks at things from their own perspective and background. I do have my own moral code that I feel pretty strongly about, but that doesn't mean everyone shares it. If everyone had the same moral beliefs and followed them then we wouldn't really need rules or laws and there wouldn't be any wars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Absolute. People who say morality is realative usually have very inconsistent moral frameworks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,704 Posts
I'm just interested to hear your opinions. Do you think that morality is relative or absolute? Explain your reasoning.
About 60 years ago, countries around the world thought it was morally right to kill people who didn't fit their view of a perfect human. Germany wasn't the only country that killed a lot of people and found it morally right, just look at Russia and Sweden. Tho Soviet Russia killed many many people in their camps.

About 300 years ago or so; having human beings as slaves was seen as alright.

It is currently immoral in quite a few countries to love people of your own gender.

I could probably bring out more examples, but I think it's quite clear that morality is relative.
@Cassidy, something I've been wondering about.
Would you kill 100 people if you saved 200? What if you were one of those 100, would you do it then?

I think to say that the morality of human beings is consistent is to lie to yourself. Our morals are only consistent if it serves us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,191 Posts
As individuals, I think we experience morality as more towards absolute. We get the feeling that something's wrong and it's hard to shake. We may be able to rationalize exceptions to the rule (be it 'the greater good', 'best worst choice' or whatever), but the basic rules strike me as feeling 'hard' to other people.

As an individual who views others as equal individuals, it becomes hard not to accept that others have equal feelings, although have answers that aren't the same as mine, which makes me act as if morality is relative, of for no other reason, a lot of the fights that would result just aren't worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,610 Posts
Just based on what I understand -

Morality isn't morals. One is a relationship between a party and an ideal, and the other probably cannot exist in a "perfect" state in the real world, assuming peoples' idea of perfect would ever match up with some sort of objective perfect. On who determines what that perfect or ultimately best is I won't discuss here. But like peoples' inability to ultimately evade death, people striving to better themselves despite being unable to reach perfection may grant benefits despite or even from such a struggle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,339 Posts
It's an absolute fiction, which serves a relative purpose in this world—that purpose being, to control controllable people. Morality is a joke; those who follow it, the doe-eyed audience who laugh at the comedian's every word, just because they're a comedian—because you're 'supposed' to laugh. The comedians are whatever moral framework it is you've chosen to adopt: utilitarianism, Kantianism, pluralism, subjectivism, a religious-based code of morals, etc. It's all the same, all the same lie, all the same joke, just told by a different comedian to a different audience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orchidion

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,141 Posts
Truth is absolute. Our perception of it is relative, which is why there are so many problems.
the only truth thats absolute is that you exist.

There is no such thing as absolute. (do I really know that?)

side note: I really like what you said and am gonna steal it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
The older I get the more I believe everyone has their own set of morals, hence why I say it is a relative term. Do I believe there is a "right" set of morals? Yes. My personal set of morals is based on Christian values.
This. Morality isn't relative. Morality is absolute. Anyone with a relative morality has a false morality. That said, a broken clock is right twice a day.

The reason for challenging your previous statement is because it's self-defeating. You can't claim everything to be relative without making a statement that has to be absolutely true. This proves that absolutes always trump relativity.

@Sovei, morality is absolute. The next question then is, "How do we tell who's morality is the right one?" Obviously, if there's a creator, the one who created us would be the most valid source for a right morality. Let me ask you this, if Apple writes up a document on how to properly maintain your Porche, who are you going to listen to when it comes to deciding when and how to change your oil? Apple or Porche?

But then we come to the problem of origins. Creator or electrified puddle of goo or seeded by aliens on vibrating crystals? Is morality relative? If you think so, your opinions have no basis for imposing them on others. Who's to say that it's wrong for me to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger, or vice versa. Why is the extinction of the human race or destruction of civilization even worth being concerned about? Morality being absolute is the only way that morality even matters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
I can choose to steal, but that doesn't mean I believe I have the right to. I can also like to steal, but also realize that I really shouldn't. There's obviously nothing tethering us to morals -- freewill still exists as it always has -- but that doesn't mean an absolute morality doesn't exist.

Because we don't know right from wrong doesn't mean there isn't a right or wrong. There are plenty of things we, as humans, have a very basic understanding of but truly fail to grasp, like gravity*; clearly something is keeping us grounded, but what it is exactly is what puzzles us. Ask different scientists and you'll be provided with different answers; does the lack of a consistent answer indicate that gravity doesn't exist?

Disagreement does not prove relativism. The evolving and changing of morals does not prove relativism. Truth exists with or without our knowledge or pursuit of it. Is everything absolute? Probably not. Is everything relative? Probably not.

*using the word 'gravity' to mean the act of being pulled, pushed, or otherwise forced onto the earth and not to mean the theory of General Relativity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,795 Posts
This. Morality isn't relative. Morality is absolute. Anyone with a relative morality has a false morality. That said, a broken clock is right twice a day.

The reason for challenging your previous statement is because it's self-defeating. You can't claim everything to be relative without making a statement that has to be absolutely true. This proves that absolutes always trump relativity.

@Sovei, morality is absolute. The next question then is, "How do we tell who's morality is the right one?" Obviously, if there's a creator, the one who created us would be the most valid source for a right morality. Let me ask you this, if Apple writes up a document on how to properly maintain your Porche, who are you going to listen to when it comes to deciding when and how to change your oil? Apple or Porche?

But then we come to the problem of origins. Creator or electrified puddle of goo or seeded by aliens on vibrating crystals? Is morality relative? If you think so, your opinions have no basis for imposing them on others. Who's to say that it's wrong for me to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger, or vice versa. Why is the extinction of the human race or destruction of civilization even worth being concerned about? Morality being absolute is the only way that morality even matters.
I believe that there are certain truths, take for example the ten commandments from the bible. I once had a professional counselor tell me that if everyone followed those rules, she would be out of a job. Thinking about it logically I believe she is correct. My point was that everyone sees the world a little differently. I will argue for the biggest pieces from my moral code to be enforced in society as I believe they are correct, but there will be those that do not hold the same values that will argue against me. So while there may indeed be some absolute truths, that doesn't mean everyone will agree with them in their own moral code.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
I think the fact that you argue about it, proves it's relative.
If it were relative, there would be no reason to argue about it. That said, I'm not arguing, I'm explaining (agreeing, to those who hold the same views). lol

So while there may indeed be some absolute truths, that doesn't mean everyone will agree with them in their own moral code.
Right. Truth, by nature, is absolute; otherwise, it is not truth. Whether or not we agree with it is irrelevant. If I've just been shot in the head and have a bullet in my brain, whether or not I agree that there's a bullet in my brain is irrelevant. It's there whether I want it to be or not and chances are, I'm going to die, whether I want to or not. Facts are stubborn things and what I want or opine carries no weight with them.

Morality built on subjectivity is worthless and holds about as much water as a sieve. The only way morality can be worth anything is if it's based on truth that carries weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,908 Posts
If it were relative, there would be no reason to argue about it.
No, if it was absolute there would be no reason to argue about it. Because if it was absolute everyone would hold the same views. Otherwise what makes it absolute? A few people saying so?

Besides, if you give a questionnaire to a couple of absolutists and ask them to tick right or wrong, I doubt that the answers will be the same. Oops. Who's the absolute and who's the faker?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agni and Luciano
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top