Moral relativism

Moral relativism is the most retarded idea that is currently popular. Literally noone is truly a relativist. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong that comes from their own faculty of reason. People may disagree on what is right and wrong, and their views may be influenced by the society they live in, but some people are more correct than others. The horrible behaviors that were viewed as acceptable in the past were never right, people just learned more about morality and wised up.

Attached: ethics-moral-relativism-2-728.jpg (728x546, 166K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/xVvVEhdf7vw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Attached: 16.jpg (1024x768, 529K)

Mark Passio goes over Moral

Attached: 19.jpg (1024x768, 424K)

all the time

Attached: 20.jpg (1024x768, 446K)

Attached: 03.jpg (1024x768, 535K)

Attached: 05.jpg (1024x768, 498K)

Attached: 06.jpg (1024x768, 420K)

Attached: 07.jpg (1024x768, 371K)

youtu.be/xVvVEhdf7vw

Attached: 15.jpg (1024x768, 676K)

Everything is relative. Suck my dick and cry into your autistic, incorrect books moralfags.

Attached: Relativity.png (1200x1200, 267K)

Define "objective"

Just practice stoicism and call it a day.

Moral relativism hinges entirely on the claim that "There is no such thing as absolute truth." This claim cannot be true, as if it is, then it itself is an absolute truth and disproves itself. As long as this claim remains the core of moral relativism, then it will always be flawed.

Trust me goys. There's no such thing as objective good or evil. . .

Attached: 1555904602703m.jpg (860x1024, 106K)

What then is the stasis for homogenous moral centrism in an ever-shifting miasma of myriad cultures with their own dogmatic parameters of acceptable conduct?

>preach moral relativism so people don't admonish existing backwards traditions in africa/sandniggerland
>it's okay when shlomo's media company does it though
>or when they do it to whites and christians in your own backyard
>or when they talk about atrocities committed by white pioneers
It's a huge wad of cognitive dissonance in academia.
We could however exploit it to handwave american slavery, krystallnacht, and Columbus to a cascade of lefty buttfluster if executed properly.

I like it, everyone else uses it against Wester civilization though. But I tjink it can be used as a tool. Dont like how whites do things? Its our culture, we dont need to bow to weakness or refrain from judging societies, as long as we admit that our actions are a result of our particular worldview. I dont think one needs to accept the normative part and tolerate all other ideas and viewpoints, just say that the context makes our ideas this way, and that we will still gladly pursue our ends.

Oh fuck off, as soon as absolute immorality is established (even using an apologetic's 'absence of good' definition), it by extension verifies absolute morality and black-and-white morality as well.
Your grey-area is no longer a gradient of right or wrong but simply a gorillion yes/no//right/wrong conflicts that keep you in a daze while Shekelblatt sneaks up behind you and picks your pocket. Zoom in on a grey image and it's nothing but a mess of black and white dots. Objective morality is a fact.

passio is a newage retard. He's got no clue of proper religious tradition. He's merely a modern larper tracing some lost steps of ancient philosophers. Who were finally succeeded by Christianity.

>Everything is relative.
Is that claim relative also then?

Attached: 1309434412503.jpg (328x316, 28K)

O dont think I could accpt that, I totally accept that morality is though. But thats most likely due to me being agnostic, as without the existence of an outside metaphysical moral arbiter, than each and every culture, custom, and moral system is socially constructed.

Moral relativism is an absolute position on morality, invalidating itself.