Finally the answer I was hoping someone would say. Almost lost faith.
Ha! Thanks for your kind comment. Take heart. Moral relativism is the easy "easy answer" for people. It spares them the torture of actually having to think.In general, what you find is that people will tend toward it in theory but when faced with its implications in practice they run away from it as fast as they can. It is why the nation's political debates are so intense even in the best of times.Still, glad I could offer you a little cheer - and thanks for the thumbs up.
Accurately stated. One of the few intelligent ones I've seen.
Thanks again. You can come to my party anytime.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
So if someone believes that stoning someone to death for apostasy is the right decision "in their opinion" then it's not considered right or wrong? There are many other examples, but let's stick to that. In the past, the vast majority of people held views that we could never come to terms with nowadays, however they were raised and conditioned with those mentalities so they couldn't help it. If opinions can't be right or wrong, then it wasn't right or wrong to enslave black people or burn jews or burn red haired people. My "opinion" is that there is always an opinion that is right or wrong or at least closer to the truth than the other.
The example you gave raises the question of "morality"Morality is completely subjective, one person's morality can not be close or closer to any truth than another person's morality. Example:>John believes murder is wrong >James believes it's ok to murder>Ana believes murder is only ok in the case of self defense.Either one of these people's opinion on murder is not closer to any "truth" than the other because we are talking about "morality", you either agree with any of them or not.In the case of something else that isn't "morality", then your last opinion becomes more of a fact than opinion.So we have something like this amendment to your last line:"The fact is that there is always an opinion that is right or wrong or at least closer to the truth than the other" Like in science, or theology or something else.Example, using that last line:John: I believe that a god created this universe James: I don't believe that there is a godOne of these opinions can be closer to the truth than the other.
right ^ I think this is what tends to get called 'justification'. So we can evaluate opinions by justification rather than truth per se. If Jane believes murder is wrong because its a threat to society, we might be able to investigate it and find that its either true or untrue (murder could as easily protect foster in-group solidarity). But if Kwame believes that murder is wrong because life has value, we might consider it justified because of the value he places on human life, or the value society places on human life; but if Frére believes that murder is fine because life has no value, we might consider it justified, but more or less justified depending on how we value human life. In this way we can consider beliefs other than statements of fact without committing ourselves to an absolute relativism.
That is not really an opinion. Based on the law in just about any country murder is unacceptable by law. That is a fact.
@rhirhi42 Where do you think laws come from? Murder being illegal in most countries is the direct consequence of most people accepting the premise that murder is objectively wrong. Morality isn't derived from laws. Laws are derived from morality. You're putting the cart before the horse.
Well it is a fact based in just about any country murder is illegal and anything that is illegal is unacceptable by law.
@rhirhi42 My assertion was not "murder is illegal", my assertion was "murder is [morally] unacceptable". You are correct that the former is a fact, however that is not what I said. What I said was the latter, which is an opinion--and a correct one.
It is a fact 2+2= 4. It isn't an opinion.
You'd think, right?
I do not think. I know it is a fact 2+2 = 4. It isn't an opinion.
Lots of people have theories that 2+2, is actually 22
Well then they are wrong.
No, it's their opinion
It isn't hard to see that 2+2=4
In your opinion
I think any person above the age of 10 should know 2+2=4
Again, in your opinion
Not an opinion. I am pretty sure most people above the age of 10 should know 2+2=4.
No hun, it's your opinion
No it isn't. I am tired of writting now. I think maybe you should ask other people and they will agree with me most people above the age of 10 knows 2+2=4.
I guarantee you it's YOUR OPINION