Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba221h [2020/05/25 18:47] – mmccann | utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba221h [2020/05/28 18:05] – mmccann | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
pre/ | pre/ | ||
- | Powerpoint: [[https:// | + | Powerpoint: [[https:// |
===== What is (moral) relativism? ===== | ===== What is (moral) relativism? ===== | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Relativism: | Relativism: | ||
> “…truth itself is relative to the standpoint of the judging subject…”((Simon Blackburn, Dictionary of Philosophy, 313.)) | > “…truth itself is relative to the standpoint of the judging subject…”((Simon Blackburn, Dictionary of Philosophy, 313.)) | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
Thus, **moral relativism** holds that the truth of a statement of morality i.e., it is wrong to murder an innocent person, is relative to the person. | Thus, **moral relativism** holds that the truth of a statement of morality i.e., it is wrong to murder an innocent person, is relative to the person. | ||
- | {{youtube> | + | " |
+ | -- Beckwith and Koukl(( // | ||
===== Example statements ===== | ===== Example statements ===== | ||
Line 35: | Line 36: | ||
Truth has nothing to do with how we came to hold it. | Truth has nothing to do with how we came to hold it. | ||
</ | </ | ||
+ | |||
Conversational: | Conversational: | ||
Line 42: | Line 44: | ||
Philosophical: | Philosophical: | ||
- | Conversational: | + | Conversational: |
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | Student B: There' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Caleb VDW: Is that right...? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student B: **visibly confused** | ||
+ | |||
+ | </ | ||
==== “We have to be tolerant, and that means respecting other opinions in morality” ==== | ==== “We have to be tolerant, and that means respecting other opinions in morality” ==== | ||
False. | False. | ||
+ | |||
Philosophical: | Philosophical: | ||
- | Conversational: | + | Conversational: |
- | < | + | |
- | //People// who deserve respect/ | + | |
+ | <note important> | ||
+ | //People// who deserve respect/ | ||
Vs. | Vs. | ||
Line 59: | Line 71: | ||
</ | </ | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | Student A: there' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maria: if there' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student A: **visibly confused** | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== “Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one.” ==== | ||
+ | False. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Philosophical: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Conversational: | ||
+ | |||
+ | " | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== “Who are you to impose your beliefs about right and wrong on me? Don’t force your opinion on me!” ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | False. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Philosophical: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Conversational: | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | We previously said, | ||
+ | “If your friend went to the bar, got drunk and then wanted to drive would you tell him not to do that? | ||
+ | Someone could say “Well, I am not sure what I would do in that situation…” | ||
+ | A ‘would’ statement involves the person in a hypothetical situation. BUT we are not asking ‘would you’ but ‘should you.’ | ||
+ | |||
+ | So, if you get this response: | ||
+ | “If your friend went to the bar, got drunk and then wanted to drive, should you tell him not to do that, despite what you would do?” | ||
+ | |||
+ | </ | ||
+ | ==== “That is just your opinion, all opinions are equal.” ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | False. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Philosophical: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Conversational: | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== “Society/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | False. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Philosophical: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Conversational: | ||
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student: no, human rights are just a social construct. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maria: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student: Yes! | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maria: why is sexual assault wrong? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student: ... well... I guess because... It violently assaults someone' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maria: I completely agree. So if it's wrong to violently assault the body of another human being, what about **this** violent assault? [//Points down at sign.// | ||
+ | |||
+ | Student: Well, that's different, they' | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== “Morals are just products of our evolutionary history. It explains why we find things to be right and wrong” ==== | ||
+ | False. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Philosophical: | ||
+ | (Also, confuses description / "this is how humans have acted" with prescription "this is how humans should act", confuses an ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Conversational: | ||
+ | ===== Moral Nihilism? ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | No morality? =Moral Nihilism | ||
+ | |||
+ | Definition: The person who believes there are no right and wrong in ANY case. | ||
+ | e.g., lynching blacks historically, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Fun fact: People aren’t really moral nihilists (under normal conditions i.e., not being a psychopath). E.g. try cutting them off in line in the grocery store--they will suddenly react as if morality exists... | ||
+ | |||
+ | However...This does not mean that you will be able to persuade everyone. | ||
+ | This is the “ultimate difficulty” in dealing with relativists and/or nihilists. | ||
+ | -> Just as you can deny your sense experience, so you can deny your moral experience. | ||
+ | |||
+ | There //is// a right and wrong, and therefore moral relativism is false | ||
+ | |||
+ | > “…the problem is that objective values do exist, and deep down we all know it. There' | ||
+ | -William Lane Craig, //Does God Exist?// | ||
+ | |||
+ | **I am worried: If I can’t prove morals exist, should I believe in them?** | ||
+ | |||
+ | “…God can be invisibly and inaudibly present, and the fact that the world cannot see him does not prove very much.” | ||
+ | -Kierkegaard, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Maybe this can help us as pro-lifers: //Moral experience// | ||
+ | |||
+ | (Think about great literature here, Jonas seeing colour, Winston seeing life beyond Big Brother, Ivan Ilyich realizing death, Faust realizing the deadliness of submitting to evil, et cetera; and think about history here, Mother Teresa saw the intrinsic value among the lowest and poorest human beings, Martin Luther King saw equality when no one else did, Maximillian Kolbe gave his life out of love when no one else would step in to save the Death Camp prisoner; think about **Jesus** here) | ||
+ | |||
+ | <note important> | ||
+ | </ | ||