relativistic

  • Thread starter Thread starter billcu1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

billcu1

Guest
Is this reasonalbe. There is an absolute truth God which we cannot know. What we know is there for relativistic. Each of us has a different reality for example. witness A and B witness an accident and give differing reports. There must be some subjective things with objective things aren’t there?
 
billcu1 said:
Is this reasonalbe. There is an absolute truth God which we cannot know. What we know is there for relativistic. Each of us has a different reality for example. witness A and B witness an accident and give differing reports. There must be some subjective things with objective things aren’t there?
Click to expand...
Given two people with the same rules of moral behaviour if the information available to them differs their moral decisions may also differ. This can show through in a number of different aspects of life. For example, there are people that will not purchase from certain stores because they have information that the store’s products may have been produced by subjecting workers to cruel decisions, while there are some that may not have not been exposed to this information and thus don’t see whether or not they purchase from that store as a moral decision.

With enough of a difference in information exposure you could see two groups of people that hold similar values (have similar objects of concern) developing different rules of moral behaviours. And some might argue their differences in moral rules as being an example of “relativistic morality.”
 
If there is an absolute truth then you can’t have subjective morals. If I were to ask two people a math problem and they give me two different answers, they are not both correct. In scripture we have everything we need to know what is right. The fact that people interpret them differently is not an indication that the morality of the Word is subjective. This does not mean that people who interpret the Bible incorrectly are evil, just that they are in need of guidance. That is what is wonderful about the Church. When we are unsure of something we have people to go to. I can talk to a priest at any time to help me understand my faith. There is nothing wrong with not knowing everything, unless we let pride blind us into believing we have a better understanding than we really do.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
Given two people with the same rules of moral behaviour if the information available to them differs their moral decisions may also differ. This can show through in a number of different aspects of life. For example, there are people that will not purchase from certain stores because they have information that the store’s products may have been produced by subjecting workers to cruel decisions, while there are some that may not have not been exposed to this information and thus don’t see whether or not they purchase from that store as a moral decision.

With enough of a difference in information exposure you could see two groups of people that hold similar values (have similar objects of concern) developing different rules of moral behaviours. And some might argue their differences in moral rules as being an example of “relativistic morality.”
Click to expand...
I’m lost on what you mean “morals”. I don’t think I mentioned any morals here. Man is lost and wouldn’t know right from wrong or what morals are anyway. He would be driven by animal thought and not climb the ladder we have to climb. Desires would go unchecked. And he would ultimately destroy himself by desire. (And I don’t just mean “sexual” desire)
 
RedFox0456 said:
If there is an absolute truth then you can’t have subjective morals. If I were to ask two people a math problem and they give me two different answers, they are not both correct. In scripture we have everything we need to know what is right. The fact that people interpret them differently is not an indication that the morality of the Word is subjective. This does not mean that people who interpret the Bible incorrectly are evil, just that they are in need of guidance. That is what is wonderful about the Church. When we are unsure of something we have people to go to. I can talk to a priest at any time to help me understand my faith. There is nothing wrong with not knowing everything, unless we let pride blind us into believing we have a better understanding than we really do.
Click to expand...
What’s “morality of the Word”
 
billcu1 said:
I’m lost on what you mean “morals”. I don’t think I mentioned any morals here. Man is lost and wouldn’t know right from wrong or what morals are anyway. He would be driven by animal thought and not climb the ladder we have to climb. Desires would go unchecked. And he would ultimately destroy himself by desire. (And I don’t just mean “sexual” desire)
Click to expand...
I believe this too can be done. My father died when I was young. There is a reality to out there that exists where he didn’t die and according to the Dalai Lama under certain circumstances we can cross over into these other realities. What Philosophy is this? I don’t know what our holy father would believe.
 
Red

** When we are unsure of something we have people to go to. I can talk to a priest at any time to help me understand my faith.**

Yes, I just hope you are talking to the right priest! 👍
 
RedFox0456 said:
I mean the moral code that has been set down and revealed to us through the scriptures.
Click to expand...
I’ve never suggested that morals as taught by the church and including the Bible was subjective. Morals are absolute. God does not change. What is wrong at one time is wrong at another time. I believe I am being a proper catholic in saying that. My examples were limited to things like for example differing details in an accident report by witnesses at different positions for example.
 
Certainly, as long as you are being truthful then discrepancy in your account of something is okay. In fact, it is expected that there will be discrepancy because people witness things from different perspectives.
 
RedFox0456 said:
Certainly, as long as you are being truthful then discrepancy in your account of something is okay. In fact, it is expected that there will be discrepancy because people witness things from different perspectives.
Click to expand...
Then does that mean that some things are indeed subjective?
 
Some things are subjective - but the example of the two witness accounts is not really a good one. While discrepancy is to be expected in statements, the true details of the incident are objective. This is why we have detectives - to figure out what really happened in those cases. A better example of something that is truly subjective would be which style of painting is best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top