Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

Cultural relativism is one of those things where I nod in agreement for the first 9/10ths of a given sentence, but then wonder what happened when it concludes with, "Therefore, it was perfectly acceptable for Culture X to practice slavery/cannibalism/infanticide/systematic rape/whatever, because they considered it to be morally right."

Helgoland's put forward a much better variation, judging individuals not as if the standards of their culture were all hunky-dory simply because they thought they were, but in terms of how they acted within those societal constraints. That's what he was getting at, PoH. Yes, I'd not hesitate to assert that ritualistic murder is objectively wrong -- I don't subscribe to the central argument of cultural relativism, and think that killing a person without meaningful justification (that is to say, not in legitimate self-defense &c.) is not acceptable. However, there is a difference between an individual of that society who deliberately makes victims suffer and one who kills their sacrifices painlessly; both are operating within the moral and ethical framework of their society, but the latter is a "good" person insofar as that their offenses are those dictated by societal norms rather than personal failings or depravity.

It's not reasonable to judge individuals wholly by the standards of a culture or society not their own, but neither is it reasonable to judge them only by the standards of their own. At least not if you're interested in an honest examination of the moral and ethical status of their actions, rather than passing judgment with sweeping generalizations.

[Baffler]

Yes, I'd not hesitate to assert that ritualistic murder is objectively wrong -- I don't subscribe to the central argument of cultural relativism, and think that killing a person without meaningful justification (that is to say, not in legitimate self-defense &c.) is not acceptable.

Thing is though, ritual murder usually has a built in cultural reason behind it. To make an extreme example, imagine an isolated group of people which uniformly believes that a human sacrifice on the winter solstice is required to bring summer again. In this society it would be immoral not to perform the sacrifice, because everyone would starve and die otherwise. My point is that "meaningful justification" is itself essentially determined by culture. Yours simply happens to have different ideas than theirs on what meaningful justification means.

[Bohandas]

It's defeatist to think that anything's inevitable, excepting perhaps the expansion of the universe and the increase of entropy in a closed system.

Also death.

That falls under "entropy"

[Putnam]

It's defeatist to think that anything's inevitable, excepting perhaps the expansion of the universe and the increase of entropy in a closed system.

Also death.

That falls under "entropy"

The human body is not even remotely a closed system.

[ggamer]

Death and taxes are pretty much the only things you can count on in life that will always happen.

[UXLZ]

Yes, I'd not hesitate to assert that ritualistic murder is objectively wrong

Except 'wrong' (in this sense) is something subjective by nature.
I'm not supporting ritualistic murder and I also think it's wrong, but  please don't bring objectivity into somewhere where it has no place.

1+1=3 is objectively 'wrong'  (incorrect is a better word, though), 'X action, x thoughts, x feelings, x things' are not.

I actually agree with you otherwise (for the most part). It's just the misuse of 'objectively' that I dislike.
I mean, I could say that ritual murder is objectively right. Doesn't actually make it anything objective, it's just a misuse of words and me trying to present my opinion as undeniable fact, and I really dislike it when people do that. Probably due to interacting with several religious nutcases before...

[King Kravoka]

It's like the clickbait ads aren't even trying.

Take a good, good look at it.

[pisskop]

That man has a carrot-foot

[UXLZ]

What, is thre something else aside from the fact that the thing on the right is obviously not a real foot?

[TD1]

I clicked it and clicked it, but nothing happened!!!!

[Bohandas]

It's defeatist to think that anything's inevitable, excepting perhaps the expansion of the universe and the increase of entropy in a closed system.

Also death.

That falls under "entropy"

The human body is not even remotely a closed system.

No, but it's part of the universe, which is. Eventually everything falls apart, one way or another.

[Parsely]

Yes, I'd not hesitate to assert that ritualistic murder is objectively wrong

Except 'wrong' (in this sense) is something subjective by nature.
I'm not supporting ritualistic murder and I also think it's wrong, but please don't bring objectivity into somewhere where it has no place.

That is true, but your wording was pretty harsh considering I think it was fairly clear what Dice was intending to say. :L The only context in which ritualistic murder would be ethically right is if it were to summon Great Cthulhu from his slumber in R'lyeh. Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

[Truean]

I love Ollie Williams is funny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkTXsa036Fw

[Bohandas]

Yes, I'd not hesitate to assert that ritualistic murder is objectively wrong -- I don't subscribe to the central argument of cultural relativism, and think that killing a person without meaningful justification (that is to say, not in legitimate self-defense &c.) is not acceptable.

Thing is though, ritual murder usually has a built in cultural reason behind it. To make an extreme example, imagine an isolated group of people which uniformly believes that a human sacrifice on the winter solstice is required to bring summer again. In this society it would be immoral not to perform the sacrifice, because everyone would starve and die otherwise. My point is that "meaningful justification" is itself essentially determined by culture. Yours simply happens to have different ideas than theirs on what meaningful justification means.

This is why I personally hold ALL cultures in contempt - even my own, just in case.

[flabort]

I would love to sig that but Truean doesn't like being quoted.
But it's such an entertaining exchange; it's too bad it's clearly fictional (at least the conversation itself going so smoothly) because it would certainly make all our lives much easier if the court worked like that, especially Truean's.