Moral relativism

From The TSP Survival Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Moral relativism is the theory that moral standards vary from society to society, and from time to time in history. Under this theory, ethical principles are not universal and are instead social products. This theory argues that there is no objective moral order or absolute truth. Indeed, variability in what is seen as moral is seen throughout history: with the holocaust of the Jews by the genocidal Germans of the National Socialist German Workers Party, the enslavement of the African people by both European and American powers, the persecution (including torture and murder) of Christians during Roman times and in Communist states, as well as the torture, imprisonment, and murder of scientists during the Eighteenth century by the Catholic Church, all justified by the perpetrators in moral terms. For example, Hitler justified his racial policies by saying:

The greatest achievements in intellectual life can never be produced by those of alien race but only by those who are inspired by the Aryan or German spirit. In view of the narrowness of the space within which German intellectual work and German intellectual workers have to live they had a natural moral claim to precedence and preference. [1]

Similarly, the case for slavery was often made in moral terms, with Thomas Dew arguing in 1832 that:

With regard to the assertion, that slavery is against the spirit of Christianity, we are ready to admit the general assertion, but deny most positively that there is any thing in the Old or New Testament, which would go to show that slavery, when once introduced, ought at all events to be abrogated, or that the master commits any offence in holding slaves. The children of Israel themselves were slave holders, and were not condemned for it.…When we turn to the New Testament, we find not one single passage at all calculated to disturb the conscience of an honest slave holder. [2]

In recent times, according to the Discovery Institute:

Moral relativism was uncritically adopted by much of the social sciences, and it still under girds much of modern economics, political science, psychology and sociology. [3]

Moral relativity is a philosophy that states there is no absolute Right or Wrong, and that anyone can freely use his own conscience to decide what is moral. A moral relativist will not say that theft or murder is wrong, because he believes it is up to the murderer or thief to decide whether his behavior is justified. "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death." (Proverbs 14:12)

Moral relativity and related foolish thinking is what allows liberals to support abortion, drug abuse and gay rights. Moral relativity erodes principled self-defense (as supported by the unalienable Bill of Rights and Second Amendment) and thereby leads to misguided [[liberal] Police state demands for gun control as well as psychiatric problems resulting from a lack of mental self-defense.

While the idea of moral relativity exists independently of (and substantially predates) the scientific theory of relativity, moral relativists seized on the theory of relativity to legitimize their liberal views. Historians such as Paul Johnson wrote about how the theory of relativity caused a sea change, justified or not, in 20th century thought.

Moral relativism as TUMOR

According to Ryan Dobson[1] moral relativism is a philosophy that can be abbreviated with mnemonic word TUMOR:

  • Tolerant: Moral relativism represents a hypocritical culture in which the "tolerance" is emphasized (tolerance is "king") even though not honored even-handedly. Criticism is in not welcome except against opponents who dare to show their own independent opinion deviating from what is considered as 'politically correct'. A misconceived virtue of tolerance ends up in tolerance of moral deviations and vileness.[2] Distorted philosophy of tolerance leads to life in complete opposition to its own central belief. Christianity calling for moral responsibility is however not tolerated by "tolerance brigade".[1] Its organized form, especially of a hierarchical sort, is a definite no-no.[note 1] Still, a moral relativist may be open to forms of Christianity offering spiritual experiences but would get likely offended by 'arrogant' claims of Absolute Truth.

See Also

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Ryan Dobson, Jefferson Scott (2007). Be Intolerant in Love: Because Some Things Are Just Stupid. Sisters, Oregon, USA: Tyndale House Publishers, 121. ISBN 978-1590-521526. 
  2. Alexander Tomský (08-April-2013). Proč žijeme v absurdním světě? (Why we are living in an absurd world?) (Czech). tyzden.sk. Retrieved on 14-April-2013. “Špatně pochopená pokora myšlení vede k relativizmu, špatně pochopená mírumilovnost k pacifismu, špatně pochopená svoboda k anarchii, špatně pochopená důstojnost k bezuzdnému voluntarismu a špatně pochopená cnost snášenlivosti k toleranci deviace a vulgarity.”


Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "note", but no corresponding <references group="note"/> tag was found

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox