The common way of arguing for moral relativism is confused and contradictory

[BidenPresident]

Immanuel Kant, the 18th-century moral philosopher, believed that everyone knew the same universal moral law, so that it was always intelligible to appeal to its presence. Williams, for the most part, thinks that what makes ethical sense is more culturally limited. When we look inside, what we find is not the moral law, but our historically formed identity.

https://aeon.co/essays/bernard-williams-moral-relativism-and-the-culture-wars

 

[BidenPresident]

" One side of the argument celebrates cultural diversity and unites this with an emphasis on the socially constructed nature of values. This is the outlook popularly associated with postmodernism, identity politics, and the rejection of universalist tradition.

This seemingly is precisely what alarms the moral conservative. Hence the other side of the culture wars: if there is no common human standard upon which to ground moral universalism, then something beyond the human is needed. This is the side of the culture wars associated with the need to return to religion, and a morally reactionary response to social diversity."

 

[evince]

It’s in the construction of normal brain wiring


Fellow preservation is self preservation


A hairless bipedal body that can’t outrun most major predators only survived and flourished because of team work


Without teamwork we were fresh meat


Compassion for others is the only reason mankind didn’t die off fast

 

[BidenPresident]

It’s in the construction of normal brain wiring


Fellow preservation is self preservation


A hairless bipedal body that can’t outrun most major predators only survived and flourished because of team work


Without teamwork we were fresh meat


Compassion for others is the only reason mankind didn’t die off fast

Or, basic survival. Cooperation can be purely utilitarian.

 

[evince]

Hating others groups because they look different and have differing societal norms is a death wish for mankind


Ideas flourish when cultures combine


Look at China


Such a closed and suspicious society has to STEAL the free worlds ideas to compete



Prejudice is the pleasure of consummate LOSERS


MELT IF YOU WISH TO GROW MANKIND

 

[evince]

Or, basic survival. Cooperation can be purely utilitarian.

And it was why we were successful as a species

We grew larger brains by needing to cooperate to survive


We grew compassion to cement in cooperation



It’s as human to be caring as it is to be intelligent



One without the other and we would not exist

 

[BidenPresident]

"The culture wars that take place over controversial moral questions are, in part, battles over which ethically loaded concepts should win out within a society. Should sexuality be conceptualised in terms connected with sexual purity and restraint (‘sanctity’, ‘chastity’ and so on) or in terms of sexual self-expression and experimentation (‘liberation’, ‘kink’ and so on)? This brings home the fact that ethical words and concepts are not just abstract ideas: they are the product and expression of different ways of living. Seen this way, the political intensity surrounding what is sometimes disparaged as ‘arguments over words’ makes total sense. The culture wars are concept wars over how best to live."

 

[Yakuda]

Immanuel Kant, the 18th-century moral philosopher, believed that everyone knew the same universal moral law, so that it was always intelligible to appeal to its presence. Williams, for the most part, thinks that what makes ethical sense is more culturally limited. When we look inside, what we find is not the moral law, but our historically formed identity.

https://aeon.co/essays/bernard-williams-moral-relativism-and-the-culture-wars

There is a universal moral law the mistake most people make is believing everyone follows it. The law however has been perverted by the idea that this moral law is malleable to meet changing social conditions.

 

[Cypress]

Immanuel Kant, the 18th-century moral philosopher, believed that everyone knew the same universal moral law, so that it was always intelligible to appeal to its presence. Williams, for the most part, thinks that what makes ethical sense is more culturally limited. When we look inside, what we find is not the moral law, but our historically formed identity.

https://aeon.co/essays/bernard-williams-moral-relativism-and-the-culture-wars

I don't see Kant being contradicted here. A universal moral conscience can exist, but it can also be cultivated and matured to a higher level of consciousness over thousands of years. They don't contradict each other.

Utilitarianism isn't very convincing to me because it reduces morality to utility and ultimately to self-interest.

Claiming morality is just something that is socially constructed is not satisfying at all. It means we would have to say there is nothing objectively wrong with gassing Jews and disabled people if most people can be convinced it is necessary for national security and the viability of the human species. Getting rid of the disabled actually makes sense in a Darwinian evolutionary framework.

 

[Hume]

Claiming morality is just something that is socially constructed is not satisfying at all. It means we would have to say there is nothing objectively wrong

But is there really a difference between saying something is wrong and something is objectively wrong? I do not think so.