3 ms·

Moral relativism is the most absurd form of moral realism, which is itself an absurd position. I'd be more interested in an explanation for why so many otherwis

Moral relativism is the most absurd form of moral realism, which is itself an absurd position. I'd be more interested in an explanation for why so many otherwise intelligent people, who are more than capable of reasoning for themselves and holding well-defended, sensible positions, find themselves attracted to moral realism, a truly mystical belief that offends science, reason, and grade school grammar.

hotdogscout 3y ago
Why do you think it is absurd? I'd think a moral relativist could support science, reason, and grade school grammar while also believing it's due to cultural factors that are not inherently true.
- vehemenz 3y ago
  > believing it's due to cultural factors that are not inherently true. Moral relativists are moral realists, meaning that they believe that moral truths are dependent, in part, on the culture in which the truths are being evaluated. So I don't think what you're talking about is moral relativism but rather, the fact that different cultures may have slightly different moral beliefs, which is obviously true. For actual objections to moral relativism, aside from the usual objections to moral realism that undercut all of these: https://iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#H4 https://iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#H4
  - hotdogscout 3y ago
    You're right, I assumed moral relativism meant something else. Thanks.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
LudwigNagasena 3y ago
I agree that moral relativism is absurd, but I don’t see any problem with moral realism. I think many intelligent people understand the boundaries of our knowledge in the domain of consciousness, cognition and agency and thus they don’t jump to conclusion that morality doesn’t exist on the grounds that there is no equation for it in string theory.
dang 3y ago
Can you please not post in the denunciatory style, but rather make your substantive points more informatively? I understand the temptation to put down a view and/or people that you think are wrong, but a comment like this doesn't help the rest of us understand anything; it's just a sequence of boos. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

hotdogscout 3y ago

Why do you think it is absurd? I'd think a moral relativist could support science, reason, and grade school grammar while also believing it's due to cultural factors that are not inherently true.

vehemenz 3y ago
> believing it's due to cultural factors that are not inherently true. Moral relativists are moral realists, meaning that they believe that moral truths are dependent, in part, on the culture in which the truths are being evaluated. So I don't think what you're talking about is moral relativism but rather, the fact that different cultures may have slightly different moral beliefs, which is obviously true. For actual objections to moral relativism, aside from the usual objections to moral realism that undercut all of these: https://iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#H4 https://iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#H4
- hotdogscout 3y ago
  You're right, I assumed moral relativism meant something else. Thanks.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

LudwigNagasena 3y ago

I agree that moral relativism is absurd, but I don’t see any problem with moral realism. I think many intelligent people understand the boundaries of our knowledge in the domain of consciousness, cognition and agency and thus they don’t jump to conclusion that morality doesn’t exist on the grounds that there is no equation for it in string theory.

dang 3y ago

Can you please not post in the denunciatory style, but rather make your substantive points more informatively? I understand the temptation to put down a view and/or people that you think are wrong, but a comment like this doesn't help the rest of us understand anything; it's just a sequence of boos. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html