5 ms·

Are we talking about moral relativism, or whether actual truth is subjective? Morals are personal/cultural values, I can't imagine equating them to "actual trut

Are we talking about moral relativism, or whether actual truth is subjective? Morals are personal/cultural values, I can't imagine equating them to "actual truth". I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof.

aidenn0 6y ago
> Morals are personal/cultural values This phrase is something I completely disagree with. Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. > I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof. I missed that subtlety , I thought you meant the general discussion of whether meritocracies are good depends on personal values. That stronger statement (that I now see you didn't make) is what I was disagreeing with.
- calibas 6y ago
  >Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. There are plenty of people who believe this, that their morals are absolute, and you can refer to the Spanish Inquisition to see exactly how "evil" that kind of thinking can get. Moral relativists are saints compared to what the Catholics have done in the name of "morality". All religious fanatics agree that morals are absolute, they just don't agree on what those morals are. Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective.
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    > Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. Actually I completely agree with this. The fact that I have biases and you have biases will cause us to both be wrong. It doesn't mean that we are equally wrong though. > To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective. That's a moral absolutist position.
    - calibas 6y ago
      >That's a moral absolutist position. It's the exact opposite, because I acknowledged those are simply my morals, they're not some universal truth that everybody else is obliged to follow. I'm convinced moral absolutism is dangerous and a major driving force behind fanaticism and authoritarianism.
      - aidenn0 6y ago
        >> That's a moral absolutist position. > It's the exact opposite, because I acknowledged those are simply my morals, they're not some universal truth that everybody else is obliged to follow. > I'm convinced moral absolutism is dangerous and a major driving force behind fanaticism and authoritarianism. So is "moral absolutism is bad" the only universal moral truth?
        calibas 6y ago
        Yes, you clever person, you caught me! I'm just a hypocrite who believes moral absolutism is objectively evil, in complete opposition to what I've been saying so far! Or maybe I believe it's dangerous because of what I've seen and experienced, but I don't believe it's objectively bad because that would be extremely silly. No, it's not bad and you're not bad, I just don't agree, I just don't see things the same way.

aidenn0 6y ago

> Morals are personal/cultural values This phrase is something I completely disagree with. Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. > I'm really not following how this relates to my original comment either, I meant your idea of "fairness" depends on personal values. The fact that people have different ideas of what's fair is conclusive proof. I missed that subtlety , I thought you meant the general discussion of whether meritocracies are good depends on personal values. That stronger statement (that I now see you didn't make) is what I was disagreeing with.

calibas 6y ago
>Morals are how one ought to behave, and how one ought to behave can intersect with cultural and personal values, but is not determined by cultural and personal values. There are plenty of people who believe this, that their morals are absolute, and you can refer to the Spanish Inquisition to see exactly how "evil" that kind of thinking can get. Moral relativists are saints compared to what the Catholics have done in the name of "morality". All religious fanatics agree that morals are absolute, they just don't agree on what those morals are. Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  > Also, and I'm sure you'll disagree, but how you quantify and qualify "merits" is based upon personal/cultural values. If you don't realize this you'll just argue endlessly with people over whose perspective is correct, not realizing you're both just viewing things through your own biases. Actually I completely agree with this. The fact that I have biases and you have biases will cause us to both be wrong. It doesn't mean that we are equally wrong though. > To me, "good morals" are trying to understand and empathize with other people, while allowing them their own unique perspective. That's a moral absolutist position.
  - calibas 6y ago
    >That's a moral absolutist position. It's the exact opposite, because I acknowledged those are simply my morals, they're not some universal truth that everybody else is obliged to follow. I'm convinced moral absolutism is dangerous and a major driving force behind fanaticism and authoritarianism.
    - aidenn0 6y ago
      >> That's a moral absolutist position. > It's the exact opposite, because I acknowledged those are simply my morals, they're not some universal truth that everybody else is obliged to follow. > I'm convinced moral absolutism is dangerous and a major driving force behind fanaticism and authoritarianism. So is "moral absolutism is bad" the only universal moral truth?
      - calibas 6y ago
        Yes, you clever person, you caught me! I'm just a hypocrite who believes moral absolutism is objectively evil, in complete opposition to what I've been saying so far! Or maybe I believe it's dangerous because of what I've seen and experienced, but I don't believe it's objectively bad because that would be extremely silly. No, it's not bad and you're not bad, I just don't agree, I just don't see things the same way.