Debate: Moral Relativism v. Moral Absolutism - Part 6

[hesster31]

@jeshopk That very competition assumes moral absolutism. We all naturally assume that morality applies to everyone, and that is why we try to say other people should live how we do. All little kids assume that every family runs the same way with the same right's and wrong's. It is not until they are older that they realize different families run differently. Humans naturally assume universal moral principles.

[bluisgrey]

At first I thought this debate was a matter of descriptive vs. prescriptive points of morality. What significant difference does it really make weather a person is a relative moralist vs. a absolute moralist? I think maybe that's what Prof. Firestone was trying to convey. The question still stands for me... What significant difference is there, if there is one at all?

[bluisgrey]

@bluisgrey I want to say that moral relativism is a description of what the world looks like today. But in reality (may it be my reality or not) the idea of morality signals an attempt by people and society to reach that which is the Ultimate moral perspective. It appears relative based on the manifestation of "absolute/ultimate" morality in social, cultural and personal understanding of right and wrong.

[bluisgrey]

@bluisgrey Maybe morality appears relative because all the information hasn't been gathered. Maybe morality appears relative because ignorance is rampant. Maybe morality doesn't appear absolute because of the same reasons... all the information hasn't been gathered. Maybe morality doesn't appear absolute because ignorance is rampant.