3 ms·

So for the first point about 'moral relativism is true' yes it's a meta-ethical statement, but at the same time, logically, you're affirming the set 'moral rela

So for the first point about 'moral relativism is true' yes it's a meta-ethical statement, but at the same time, logically, you're affirming the set 'moral relativism'. And the second point, I would argue that 'universal moral values' arise from 'absolute moral values', whatever that might be, if it's even possible to know it. I also don't think that moral relativism is a logical negation of moral absolutism, more like an opposing view.

fluoridation 3y ago
But my point is that the existence of universal moral values do not prove the existence of absolute moral values, because universal moral values can also arise in the absence of absolute moral values (or it would have to be demonstrated that they can't). That every moral agent agrees that murder is wrong does not prove that murder is wrong independently of any point of view.