Moral Relativism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fieryjades
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fieryjades

Guest
As a Catholic, I believe in God’s laws/morals and follow Church’s teachings. However, society todays seems to be following “personal morals” i.e. moral relativism. Does anyone have ideas or strategies to combat moral relativism?

Peace be with you!
Fieryjades
 
Moral relativism is self-defeating.

It says, “the only moral truths are that there are no moral truths,” which is a moral truth.

To say there are no moral truths and then declare a moral truth is to contradict yourself, and therefore make your argument meaningless.

Peace
 
40.png
dennisknapp:
Moral relativism is self-defeating.

It says, “the only moral truths are that there are no moral truths,” which is a moral truth.

To say there are no moral truths and then declare a moral truth is to contradict yourself, and therefore make your argument meaningless.

Peace
Click to expand...
Great point. Someone usually argues moral relativism in order to support a certain behavior. I’ve found in my arguments with them, if you push them hard enough, they either will have to admit that there are moral truths or that “might makes right” (which would be another moral truth I guess).
 
I think a person sees a ‘pick and choose’ attitude quite a bit here in the USA. How many denominations are there? This moral relativism, I would think is not relatively new - every schism in The Church was due to somone not adhering to some teaching or belief that was personally unacceptable. I tend to remember that Jesus told us that not everyone would be saved from Hell; moral relativism tells me that when you ‘pick’ what works for you, then you are defining your own salvation. That sees to defy logic to me.

Just my thoughts.

Bill
 
Thank you for your responses! It seems to me that moral relativism cannot be done in practice without hypocripsy.

I have a Wiccan friend who brought up this issue. He said that morals are relative because no society has the exact same morals, so therefore morals are defined by society. Any responses to this?

Peace,
Fieryjades
 
40.png
Fieryjades:
Thank you for your responses! It seems to me that moral relativism cannot be done in practice without hypocripsy.

I have a Wiccan friend who brought up this issue. He said that morals are relative because no society has the exact same morals, so therefore morals are defined by society. Any responses to this?

Peace,
Fieryjades
Click to expand...
That’s the might makes right argument. They better be ready to submit to the will of the majority where they live if they believe this.
 
Fieryjades, I don’t have any new ideas on talking to your Wiccan friend. I’ve been thinking lately about the connection between eugenics and moral relativism. The Nazis loved eugenics - they chose certain groups (Christians, Jews, retards, elderly) and did all they could to exterminate the unfit. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood in the US, was very racist and anti-male; she even spoke at a women’s KKK meeting. That should tell any anti-lifers (pro-choice, pro-abortion) that abortion is wrong. Anyway…I hope this post makes sense. Sorry it doesn’t flow coherently.

God bless you,
Corinne
 
From Liberalism is a SIn

**Chapter 7 Intrinsic Causes of Liberal Catholicism

** Strange as may seem that anomaly called Liberal Catholicism, its reason is not far to seek. It takes its root in a false conception of the nature of the act of faith. The Liberal Catholic assumes as the formal motive of the act of faith, not the infallible authority of God revealing supernatural truth, but his own reason deigning to accept as true what appears rational to him according to the appreciation and measure of his own individual judgment. He subjects God’s authority to the scrutiny of his reason, and not his reason to God’s authority. He accepts Revelation, not on account of the infallible Revealer, but because of the “infallible” receiver. With him the individual judgment is the rule of faith. He believes in the independence of reason. It is true he accepts the Magisterium of the Church, yet he does not accept it as the sole authorized expounder of divine truth. He reserves, as a coefficient factor in the determination of that truth, his own private judgment. The true sense of revealed doctrine to him is not always certain, and human reason therefore has something to say in the matter, as for instance, the limits of the Church’s infallibility may be determined by human science. Within lines thus prescribed, the declarations of the Church to him are infallible, but these limits are not to be determined by the Church herself. Science will do that for her. She is of course infallible, they say, but we will determine when and in what she shall speak infallibly. Such is the absurdity which the Liberal Catholic falls into by placing the formal motive of faith in human reason.
 
40.png
Fieryjades:
Thank you for your responses! It seems to me that moral relativism cannot be done in practice without hypocripsy.

I have a Wiccan friend who brought up this issue. He said that morals are relative because no society has the exact same morals, so therefore morals are defined by society. Any responses to this?

Peace,
Fieryjades
Click to expand...
Here is a great website. It has alot of articles regarding our current culture.

peterkreeft.com/

Peace
 
By making ourselves gods and creating our own morals (which may include abortion, contraception, homosexuality, enthunasia), we are denying God.

By denying God, we deny God’s innate dignity in ALL human life and thus making it “moral acceptable” to murder the elderly, the unborn, the unwanted, etc. as we tout homosexuality which inherently cannot produce children.

Therefore, by denying God, we kill our humanity presently and eternally. Humanity cannot survive without God.
 
I think people are psychologically incapable of commiting an unjustified or unjustifiable act.
 
40.png
Pentecost2005:
I think people are psychologically incapable of commiting an unjustified or unjustifiable act.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by that? Please explain.
 
I did a stand up presentation for my philsophy class back in college about moral relativism. I made the claim that no matter what culture you are from people still believe in basically the same things. Such as its wrong to kill, steal, and lie. They went absoultly balistic in class because they cant wrap their finger around such a concept.

Josh
 
40.png
Pentecost2005:
I think people are psychologically incapable of commiting an unjustified or unjustifiable act.
Click to expand...
You might have a point if and only if you add the words
“TO THEM” to the end of your statement. If they can justify it to themselves in any warped way they can find, then they can do it. Which just goes back to people making themselves a god so they can do whatever they want.

John
 
Why do you think moral absolutes are such a hard concept for some to master? Or rather, why do you think moral relativism is so prevalent in our culture?
 
40.png
Fieryjades:
Why do you think moral absolutes are such a hard concept for some to master? Or rather, why do you think moral relativism is so prevalent in our culture?
Click to expand...
People would rather do whatever they want. It’s more convenient. Plus, people have soft skin. Being told that their lifestyle is wrong hurts their feelings.
 
40.png
Fieryjades:
Why do you think moral absolutes are such a hard concept for some to master? Or rather, why do you think moral relativism is so prevalent in our culture?
Click to expand...
Because it is inconveniant, because we are selfish, because we are prideful and don’t want to submit to others. My opinion is that pride and selfishness go hand in hand trying and in many cases successfully leading us all to that basket being lowered into the pit.

Hey, we need an emoticon of “going to H*** in a handbasket”

John
 
40.png
Fieryjades:
As a Catholic, I believe in God’s laws/morals and follow Church’s teachings. However, society todays seems to be following “personal morals” i.e. moral relativism. Does anyone have ideas or strategies to combat moral relativism?

Peace be with you!
Fieryjades
Click to expand...
It defeats itself when it contradicts itself by saying that murder is evil, but abortion is not.
 
40.png
Genesis315:
People would rather do whatever they want. It’s more convenient. Plus, people have soft skin. Being told that their lifestyle is wrong hurts their feelings.
Click to expand...
I think you hit a key idea behind moral relativism - it always seems wrong to have your feelings hurt, doesn’t it? Isn’t it interesting how our ‘feelings’ might dictate our decisions?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top