Square roots and Moral Relativism

[Ana the Ist]

Is saying Rape is always wrong like saying √64 is always 8?

Is saying Child molestation is always wrong like saying √64 is always 8?

Is saying Murder is always wrong like saying √64 is always 8?

Is Not loving our neighbor as ourselves always wrong like saying √64 is always 8?

Who says that the proposition "rape is wrong objectively" needs to be proven? When we see someone being raped, do we not know that is never something anyone should ever do? In fact, I would say it is even more evident that rape is always wrong than the fact that √64 is 8 because one has to be taught how to do square roots to get the right answer. We do not have to be taught that rape is wrong, we know its wrong.And if someone gets their math wrong, does that mean that the √64 is not 8? Of course not! If someone says that rape is not always wrong, does that mean it is not always wrong? If we don't even know how to do square roots, does that mean √64 is not 8? Of course not.

Rape is either objectively wrong or it is not. If it is not objectively wrong, then you have to admit that it is just an opinion, no different from the opinion that some may have that ice cream is good. Ice cream being good is either an objective fact or it is not. Ice cream being good is not an objective fact because it is a personal taste preference. If rape is not an objective fact, then it is a personal preference. Some like it some don't. Subjective facts exist only with regards to personal preference. Objective facts are never not true.

Rape is either a preference I.e. some prefer it and some don't. Some like it some don't and that is up to the person's taste.

Or rape is objectively wrong, meaning always wrong. Wrong even if people like rape.

Or it is not a morally good or bad act, it's just an act that someone does, like doing math sums. Adding and subtracting is neither morally good or bad. Its just adding and subtracting.

So which one is rape more plausibly?

No...opinions given or held about moral judgements are not factual. They are opinions. If you had stuck around long enough in your "I stand amazed" post you would've read a situation which I outlined where I would find rape/molestation acceptable. I daresay that many people would agree under the same circumstances...perhaps even you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Here is a copy of that post...of course I'm interested in hearing anyone weigh-in.

" In the interest of showing off my imagination...I will now describe a situation in which I believe most would find rape/molestation acceptable. Let's skip a short way into the future where certain medical/psychological advances have been made. Your husband/wife is in a deep coma after a terrible accident. They are not consciously responsive...and only somewhat physiologically responsive. After weeks with no change in condition...a Dr. approaches you with an idea. He tells you that they've had some success with these types of comas by stimulating certain areas of the brain. These areas are coincidentally the areas stimulated by sexual activity. He tells you that by having sex/or molestation with the coma victim, there is a fair chance they will leave the coma. He tells you they've tried everything else and the longer the coma endures...the greater the risk for brain damage.

You decide to consult your lawyer, and he assures you that since no consent was given, this act would legally constitute rape. If your husband/wife were to pursue legal action...you would undeniably be convicted.

So who here would commit rape/molestation for the chance at a loved one getting their life back? I can only assure this isn't as far-fetched as it may sound. _"___________