Are we in a post moral relativist culture ?

stevevw · Thursday at 7:45 AM

I say this because it seems that the counter culture has been around for some time now. It began with the 60's revolutions as a reaction against the church and establishment.

It moved into academia with Post Modernist Critical theories. It then finally infiltrated mainstream culture and norms.

But I think enough time has gone by that we can now look back and see how this ideology has been lived out in reality.

And its not a pretty picture.

Its almost like what the moral revolution was rejecting in the traditional beliefs is now being seen in a new light of a failed ideology and in failing has only strengthened the truth that was being rejected.

Except now as we see the lies and evil that comes from the relativists worldview. Or rather its inevitable consequences. The relativists knows it. Or has little moral basis and almost has to admit that this actually promotes evil. But so what they say. Its a right.

The moral relativists experiment has been allowed to flourish and its now found wanting. But rather than acknowledge there is moral truths and a truth giver. It seems the relativist is doubling down. Taking a side.

Because this is fundementally about who is god of this world. The Self or God. Has it now come to the point where each side has declared their positions and its game on. Or will the truth win out in the end.

Neogaia777 · Thursday at 7:58 AM

@stevevw

I think we have (or are starting to) evolve to a point that most of the population realizes that any truly just judgement, of, especially an individual person, or a individual person's life, is extremely, extremely complex/complicated, because there is just too much that needs to be considered, and/or weighed in/calculated, etc. Also that morality is different across cultures also, which is also just too much to calculate, etc. All of these factors, and all of the different potential/possible combinations of them, are or is, etc.

God Bless.

2PhiloVoid · Thursday at 8:00 AM

stevevw said:
I say this because it seems that the counter culture has been around for some time now. It began with the 60's revolutions as a reaction against the church and establishment.

It moved into academia with Post Modernist Critical theories. It then finally infiltrated mainstream culture and norms.

But I think enough time has gone by that we can now look back and see how this ideology has been lived out in reality.

And its not a pretty picture.

Its almost like what the moral revolution was rejecting in the traditional beliefs is now being seen in a new light of a failed ideology and in failing has only strengthened the truth that was being rejected.

Except now as we see the lies and evil that comes from the relativists worldview. Or rather its inevitable consequences. The relativists knows it. Or has little moral basis and almost has to admit that this actually promotes evil. But so what they say. Its a right.

The moral relativists experiment has been allowed to flourish and its now found wanting. But rather than acknowledge there is moral truths and a truth giver. It seems the relativist is doubling down. Taking a side.

Because this is fundementally about who is god of this world. The Self or God. Has it now come to the point where each side has declared their positions and its game on. Or will the truth win out in the end.

It is and always has been the Christian Church against the anti-christs. It's no different today than it was 2,000 years ago, but somehow, we've deluded ourselves into thinking we finally achieved this or that 'Christian Nation' when no such thing has ever fully taken place and we think some sort of drastic, major sea change in human morality has taken place. No, what has taken place is the faltering of faith. And this was always to be expected. But we're somehow 'surprised' by it all.

stevevw · Thursday at 10:12 AM

2PhiloVoid said:
It is and always has been the Christian Church against the anti-christs. It's no different today than it was 2,000 years ago, but somehow, we've deluded ourselves into thinking we finally achieved this or that 'Christian Nation' when no such thing has ever fully taken place and we think some sort of drastic, major sea change in human morality has taken place. No, what has taken place is the faltering of faith. And this was always to be expected. But we're somehow 'surprised' by it all.

Yeah I think the (present tense) is always made to be the most important. Like its a unique time thats more special than any other time.

I agree that this same cycle has happened before. people have gained and lost faith. Revivals and purifications have repeated throughout time. Empires rise and defeat religion and then fall again.

But I also think that as we evolve we are also collecting that history. Its not new to us like you say. But now its old to us. We can look back and see the patterns and derive from that some truths through our experiences.

If the idea is to be moving towards some moral truth that we learn from our past and we strive to be better and for Christians more Christlike. We have all the mistakes and rationalisations now. We have a whole library of real lived experiences in putting into practice these beliefs and ideologies.

So I am not sure if it is the same as in the past. Its like we have less excuses now because we know better than we ever have done in the past. Its almost like we have run the tests 10 times over and keep getting the same results.

Because we are now older and wiser and have an accumulation of knowledge we now have a better conscious awareness of the truth and reality of what is the moral truth.

So now its a case of knowing whether you stand for the truth or you don't. With that I think is also a choice of standing with God or not. Its more clear what each side stands for.

Whereas in the past the moral relativists got away with it. The rationalisations made sense. They were logical and appealed to feelings. But now after many decades the lies have been exposed and the idea that morality is relative and there is no moral truth is exposed as a lie. A false promise that has no basis anymore. In fact it is exposed as promoting immorality.

Hans Blaster · Thursday at 10:18 AM

stevevw said:
I say this because it seems that the counter culture has been around for some time now. It began with the 60's revolutions as a reaction against the church and establishment.

It moved into academia with Post Modernist Critical theories. It then finally infiltrated mainstream culture and norms.

But I think enough time has gone by that we can now look back and see how this ideology has been lived out in reality.

And its not a pretty picture.

Its almost like what the moral revolution was rejecting in the traditional beliefs is now being seen in a new light of a failed ideology and in failing has only strengthened the truth that was being rejected.

That's quite a picture you paint, Steve. I wish I could take it seriously.

stevevw said:
Except now as we see the lies and evil that comes from the relativists worldview. Or rather its inevitable consequences. The relativists knows it. Or has little moral basis and almost has to admit that this actually promotes evil. But so what they say. Its a right.

The moral relativists experiment has been allowed to flourish and its now found wanting. But rather than acknowledge there is moral truths and a truth giver. It seems the relativist is doubling down. Taking a side.

Morality is subjective. (Even when you claim it is from the mind of a god, it is still subjective unless it applies to that god.)
Ethics are situational. I'm not sure that the term "moral relativism" has any usefulness. (Non-polemically that is. It still works good for you polemics.)

stevevw said:
Because this is fundementally about who is god of this world. The Self or God. Has it now come to the point where each side has declared their positions and its game on. Or will the truth win out in the end.

I really wish you and others would stop making this claim about "self = god". No one you are or will be arguing with on these threads thinks that. My position is that given that morality is subjective, what do we value to base morality on and how do we negotiate morality with others.

Say it aint so · Thursday at 12:05 PM

stevevw said:
I say this because it seems that the counter culture has been around for some time now. It began with the 60's revolutions as a reaction against the church and establishment.

It moved into academia with Post Modernist Critical theories. It then finally infiltrated mainstream culture and norms.

But I think enough time has gone by that we can now look back and see how this ideology has been lived out in reality.

And its not a pretty picture.

Its almost like what the moral revolution was rejecting in the traditional beliefs is now being seen in a new light of a failed ideology and in failing has only strengthened the truth that was being rejected.

Except now as we see the lies and evil that comes from the relativists worldview. Or rather its inevitable consequences. The relativists knows it. Or has little moral basis and almost has to admit that this actually promotes evil. But so what they say. Its a right.

The moral relativists experiment has been allowed to flourish and its now found wanting. But rather than acknowledge there is moral truths and a truth giver. It seems the relativist is doubling down. Taking a side.

Because this is fundementally about who is god of this world. The Self or God. Has it now come to the point where each side has declared their positions and its game on. Or will the truth win out in the end.

The churches morals are in fact relative. The God of the Abrahamic religions morals are in fact relative. To me, morals are in fact relative to time, place, and culture.

zippy2006 · Friday at 3:48 PM

stevevw said:
The moral relativists experiment has been allowed to flourish and its now found wanting. But rather than acknowledge there is moral truths and a truth giver. It seems the relativist is doubling down. Taking a side.

It's not entirely clear what group you're speaking about, but a lot of the relativism generated by World War II is now being shown to be incoherent, involving impossible double standards (as Popper's 1945 salvo was already intuiting). So one might say that the relativisms have ossified into dogmatic positions, but in reality they were always dogmatic positions.

To take an example, when the leftist activist speaks about high-sounding concepts like cultural relativism or anti-racism, they are obviously including some cultures and exempting others; including some races and excluding others. For instance, "Don't be racist," actually turns out to mean, "Be very kind to black, Hispanic, and Native Americans; be mildly suspicious of Asians; and hate white people." The actual idea that race is insignificant was very short-lived. In reality such activists want a different form of racism, or a different form of cultural normativity, etc.

stevevw · Friday at 8:28 PM

Hans Blaster said:
That's quite a picture you paint, Steve. I wish I could take it seriously.

Ok

Hans Blaster said:
Morality is subjective.

Is that an objective truth.

Hans Blaster said:
(Even when you claim it is from the mind of a god, it is still subjective unless it applies to that god.)
Ethics are situational. I'm not sure that the term "moral relativism" has any usefulness. (Non-polemically that is. It still works good for you polemics.)

What do you mean by ethics is situational. How does this negate that we can determine which acts are more more than others for each situation.

What I am saying that under the relativists banner you can show how this has failed as a moral position. Enough time has gone by to actually live out the relativists philosophy on morals to show it is actually wrong as a moral position.

Hans Blaster said:
I really wish you and others would stop making this claim about "self = god". No one you are or will be arguing with on these threads thinks that. My position is that given that morality is subjective, what do we value to base morality on and how do we negotiate morality with others.

Once again its not a case of what you say but but the reality is. The fact is this is humans without God will look to (self) as the gods of their own worlds. Its been a fact for millenia.

stevevw · Friday at 8:37 PM

zippy2006 said:
It's not entirely clear what group you're speaking about, but a lot of the relativism generated by World War II is now being shown to be incoherent, involving impossible double standards (as Popper's 1945 salvo was already intuiting). So one might say that the relativisms have ossified into dogmatic positions, but in reality they were always dogmatic positions.

Yes that is part of the failed experiment. As you say relativism has always been dogmatic but its only recently that we are exposing this. Despite this it was rationalised away. There was no arguement that could defeat it. But given enough lived reality it can now be shown to be an unreal position.

zippy2006 said:
To take an example, when the leftist activist speaks about high-sounding concepts like cultural relativism or anti-racism, they are obviously including some cultures and exempting others; including some races and excluding others. For instance, "Don't be racist," actually turns out to mean, "Be very kind to black, Hispanic, and Native Americans; be mildly suspicious of Asians; and hate white people." The actual idea that race is insignificant was very short-lived. In reality such activists want a different form of racism, or a different form of cultural normativity, etc.

Yes thats one example of many. When you look under the surface we find its incoherent and actually promoting bad stuff. But this could have only been done in recent times because enough time has gone by to put those ideas into reality and allow it to play out many times.

Now we have further information from lived reality that shows these relativist morality does not work and that even relavists believe in moral universal truths by the way they act.

I don't think the arguements are new or that some new arguement can now defeat moral relativism. Its more that theres been a cultural shift that has weakened the moral relativists position and strengthened the moral objective position.

The same arguements apply but they are now bolstered by the self undermining nature of moral relativism which has taken time to be exposed through putting this into reality. Enough time has gone by now that people can easily defeat any moral relaivists arguements now by drawing on that lived reality. They have to admit their moral position is self defeating.

zippy2006 · Friday at 8:51 PM

stevevw said:
Its more that theres been a cultural shift that has weakened the moral relativists position and strengthened the moral objective position.

Right, and in many ways it's just that relativists and pluralists can't accommodate Islam. Now that Islam is becoming more prominent in the West, this fact is harder to avoid.

Hans Blaster · Friday at 9:46 PM

stevevw said:
Ok

Is that an objective truth.

That is how objective and subjective are defined. Unless morals are some property of the universe and everything, from the tiniest mouse to the cleaverist human to the most powerful god is subject to that property, then morality is a product of *some* mind (human, god, cat, etc.) and therefore *SUBJECTIVE*. (I suggest you not argue against the dictionary, but do what you will as I can't stop you in your tilt against the windmills of reality.)

stevevw said:
What do you mean by ethics is situational. How does this negate that we can determine which acts are more more than others for each situation.

It is how we apply moral principle to situations.

stevevw said:
What I am saying that under the relativists banner you can show how this has failed as a moral position. Enough time has gone by to actually live out the relativists philosophy on morals to show it is actually wrong as a moral position.

We've had a lot of discussions, Steve. Clearly we do not agree on moral prinicples. If you want to call subjective moral opinions "relativist" you can -- both yours and mine.

stevevw said:
Once again its not a case of what you say but but the reality is.

No, no, no, it's not the reality. I don't know anyone who thinks they is a god.

stevevw said:
The fact is this is humans without God will look to (self) as the gods of their own worlds. Its been a fact for millenia.

I asked you to stop. I see you persist in your wrongness. Sigh.

stevevw · Saturday at 6:46 AM

Hans Blaster said:
That is how objective and subjective are defined. Unless morals are some property of the universe and everything, from the tiniest mouse to the cleaverist human to the most powerful god is subject to that property, then morality is a product of *some* mind (human, god, cat, etc.) and therefore *SUBJECTIVE*. (I suggest you not argue against the dictionary, but do what you will as I can't stop you in your tilt against the windmills of reality.)

So therefore you will have to admit that your claim that morality is subjective is just an opinion. Holds no weight. I could say that morals are objective and it would be just as worthy of an answer as yours.

Didn't Lewis say something about the universe and justice. I think morality is a property of the universe. We make it so. Just like free will and choice. We live that reality and therefor make it real.

Hans Blaster said:
It is how we apply moral principle to situations.

Yes but situational does not equal relative morality. Each and every situations demands its own moral truth for that situation. We can determine that some acts are more moral that other acts.

Hans Blaster said:
We've had a lot of discussions, Steve. Clearly we do not agree on moral prinicples. If you want to call subjective moral opinions "relativist" you can -- both yours and mine.

What I am saying is that after such a long time like anything we see enough examples of lived reality to then determine whether the relative moral ideology is realistic and works. That it actually harms society.

What I am trying to do is move beyond the countless debates that never go anywhere because people say there is no truth to morality. To show how the philosophy of relative morality has actually worked and failed.

Thus we are in a post moral relative period where people are seeing the unreality and harm of such an ideology. The moral relativists have lost credibility. Their arguements hold no weight.

Hans Blaster said:
No, no, no, it's not the reality. I don't know anyone who thinks they is a god.

Its not a case of declaring they are a god. I am not saying that. I am saying they are acting like they are gods. Its a natural thing to do if there is no God. The next being down the line to uphold and worship is humans. We see examples everywhere.

Its happened time and time again throughout history. When humans deny God they become their own gods or make gods of people and animals and nature. But with humans as the ultimate god or being that holds the most worth over everything.

Hans Blaster said:
I asked you to stop. I see you persist in your wrongness. Sigh.

Why when its an historical fact and one playing out right now. Your claim of wrongness is wrong itself.

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 12:15 PM

stevevw said:
So therefore you will have to admit that your claim that morality is subjective is just an opinion. Holds no weight. I could say that morals are objective and it would be just as worthy of an answer as yours.

Only if you are willing to subject your god to those morals.

stevevw said:
Didn't Lewis say something about the universe and justice.

Don't know who you are talking about.

stevevw said:
I think morality is a property of the universe.

Oh, boy, you did go there. Perhaps I will ask why you would think so or how you can demonstrate it, a bit later. Not sure how that could be given the inconsistency in how morality is applied by various civilizations and species.

stevevw said:
We make it so. Just like free will and choice. We live that reality and therefor make it real.

How do humans make the universe have morality as a fundamental property. This feels like some sort of projection. (or wishcasting)

stevevw said:
Yes but situational does not equal relative morality. Each and every situations demands its own moral truth for that situation. We can determine that some acts are more moral that other acts.

Every situation has its own moral truth? That's a lot of very specific moral truths. This seems like an overstatement.

stevevw said:
What I am saying is that after such a long time like anything we see enough examples of lived reality to then determine whether the relative moral ideology is realistic and works. That it actually harms society.

Evidence based morality -- I kind of like it.

stevevw said:
What I am trying to do is move beyond the countless debates that never go anywhere because people say there is no truth to morality. To show how the philosophy of relative morality has actually worked and failed.

Thus we are in a post moral relative period where people are seeing the unreality and harm of such an ideology. The moral relativists have lost credibility. Their arguements hold no weight.

It seem that your relative morals complained about are just ones that aren't "biblical-traditional". I could demonstrate those are not good, but the mods wouldn't like that...

stevevw said:
Its not a case of declaring they are a god. I am not saying that. I am saying they are acting like they are gods.

We don't.

stevevw said:
Its a natural thing to do if there is no God. The next being down the line to uphold and worship is humans. We see examples everywhere.

I see absolutely no reason to worship anything. I think worship is undignified.

stevevw said:
Its happened time and time again throughout history. When humans deny God they become their own gods or make gods of people and animals and nature. But with humans as the ultimate god or being that holds the most worth over everything.

This is just your dogma -- a dogma that insists we all need gods and will make them up if none exist.

I didn't have any desire to worship when I thought there was a god. I have even less interest now.

stevevw said:
Why when its an historical fact and one playing out right now. Your claim of wrongness is wrong itself.

I see you persist in your wrongness.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Are we in a post moral relativist culture ?

inquisitive

Old Soul

It's Metropolis! Enjoy the stay!

inquisitive

Call Me Al

Well-Known Member

Dragonsworn

inquisitive

inquisitive

Dragonsworn

Call Me Al

inquisitive

Call Me Al

Similar threads