MORAL RELATIVISMPeter Kreeft

Are we truly free? To live freely is to live spiritually Spirit is free – matter is not

E.g. locked in prison can choose attitude Spirit

Intellect – Truth Will – Goodness

Moral principles – absolutes Unchanging rocks beneath waves of

feelings and practices

Is this really important? Yes. “Philosophy is just thought, but sow

a thought, reap an act; sow an act, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a destiny.”

Yes. A society of relativists has not existed. Either: Disprove all of history Repent and survive Persist and perish

Salvation presupposes repentance (turning from); which presupposes a real moral law

Three claims of moral relativism

Morality is changeable Shifts with time and no need to turn back

Morality is subjective Based upon what we think and feel We become the standard of measuring

ourselves Nothing good or bad besides thinking it is

Morality is individual True for you but not for me

Moral absolutism there are principles that are unchangeable, objective, and universal

Psychological Argument 1 Deepest desire is for happiness Fear that absolutism would make us

unhappy by making us feel guilty Argument form:

Good morality = good consequences Bad morality = bad consequences Unhappiness/guile = bad consequence = bad

morality Happiness/self-esteem = good = good Moral relativism = good morality Absolutism = bad morality

Psychological Argument 2 Moral law exists to maximize happiness

Labels for food/maps for roads Guilt is good?

Guilt may be necessary to avoid greater unhappiness

If guilt is true to reality then it is like pain Pain – warning to body Guilt – warning to soul

Would a morality based upon feeling makes us happy?

Begging the question Morality is relative because relativism

makes us feel better. Assumption – our feelings are the standard

of morality But this is the claim the relativist is trying

to prove Also called “Circular reasoning” Example: Snake venom will make you

sick because it is toxic.

Cultural Influence 1 Different cultures have different moralities

as discovered by sociologists Unspoken assumption: Rightness is a

matter of obedience to your culture’s values Argument:

It is right to always obey your culture’s values Different cultures have different values Therefore: moral rightness differs with cultures

Begs the question Absolutist denies that it is always right to

obey cultures values

Cultural Influence 2 Weakness: Equivocation of values with opinions about values

Absolutist distinguishes objective truth from subjective opinions about: God Life after death Happiness Numbers Beauty

Cultural Influence 3 All cultures do not differ on fundamental

values Justice, honesty, courage, wisdom, hope,

self-control But that we can have a conversation

about values implies that we have some agreements

Think about translating from one language to another We translate concepts and identify

concepts with words So too social laws (changing) use

concepts from moral human laws (universal)

Social Conditioning “All values are conditioned by society”

If we were in China we would be atheists If we were in a Muslim country, we’d be

Muslim Also confuses values with opinions about

them False assumption: everything learned

from society is subjective Learn rules of basketball but also

multiplication tables Also existence of principle non

conformists is evidence against being socially conditioned

Freedom 1 Are we free if not free to create values? If we are free to create values, who or

what is to decide between two people in conflict? Truth? Justice? Then these are values that

transcend both people and should be obeyed by both Then we are not free to dismiss ourselves from

that obligation No principle outside of subjective selves?

Then argument come down to force Force does not guarantee freedom

Freedom 2 Freedom does not create values, it

presupposes values Relativist assumes that freedom is

valuable At least one objective value

If freedom good then free from something bad Some objective good, some objective bad

Freedom for some? Freedom for all? How would we measure who deserves? If

for all then we must value equality

Freedom 3 We are free to create alternative social

mores but cannot create alternative morals. Mores – (more-ays) – are customs and

conventions of a community. Examples? We are not free to make charity wrong or

treason right. If all morals were created by us then we

would not feel bound by our conscience in breaking them.

No moral obligation to do wrong.

Tolerance 1 Relativism claims that it guarantees

tolerance Tolerance is a quality of people, not

ideas. Ideas may be fuzzy or well defined but that does not make them more or less tolerant.

Science is based on absolute and objective facts but not intolerant to different theories. Absolute does not equal intolerance.

One may teach hard facts softly or soft facts in a harsh manner.

Tolerance 2 Is tolerance good? Should we be tolerant? If

no objective call to tolerance then tolerance is an imposition.

What if tolerance no longer popular? Tolerance on its own is in describing our

patience with evils as opposed to goods. We don’t tolerate goods.

Cultural differences of tolerance and intolerance

Even if absolutism did cause intolerance it does not make it not true

Situationalism 1 Diversity of situations excludes universal

norms Stealing to feed starving family

Closely related: Motives determining morality Manslaugher/Attempted Murder

Truth is both motives and situations along with the act itself determine morality. What you do When, where and how Why

Situationalism 2 Situations are objective Motives are subjective but are judged

objectively Will to harm is always evil

To ask for flexible application presupposes that there are rigid standard

Judge not lest ye be judged Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the

judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye – Matthew 7:1-5

Judgment - Truth telling that sheds light so that both good and bad may appear

Arguments for Absolutism Not enough to deconstruct arguments

for relativism Tearing down is necessary sometimes,

but then we must rebuild We tear up the soil so that we may plant

seeds

Consequences Consequences are relative indicator

Clues that allow us to draw conclusion Majority of immoral deeds feel good Relativism has not produced a saint or society Everything I have said and done is these last years is

relativism, by intuition. From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology, and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable. If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories, and men who claim to be the bearers of an objective immortal truth, then there is nothing more relativistic than fascism.       —Benito Mussolini

Tradition!

Tradition Egalitarianism extended through history “Democracy of the dead” Relativists believes that the vast

majority of people have ordered their lives based on an illusion of moral principle

Moral Experience Language of “ought” “should” “right”

“wrong” Example of a promise and temptation to

break promise Certain desires push from inside Other obligations pull from outside

Primary data – because EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE experiences this situation

Ad Hominem Basically that the relativist abandons

relativism when he or she is victimized by relativism

There is then an implicit appeal to a moral standard outside of themselves to justify anger or hurt experienced by relativistic behavior

Moral Language We argue about right and wrong on principle If not then simply tests of strength What allows us to say “That isn’t fair”? We don’t praise, blame, counsel or command

non-moral agents (do-ers of action) Vending machine doesn’t “steal” your money, it

is simply malfunctioning You can’t guilt a parking meter into giving you

more time, although you can try to convince officer that the machine is broken

Cause and Cure Moral relativism is not caused by

arguments It is the throwing away of reason:

rationalization Rationalization is to try and explain away

something done by using logic Passions should be governed by logic-

self control Strongest desire is the one desire that is

fulfilled by sharing life with another. The desire that calls us to union, i.e. sexual desire.

Sexual revolution Separated sex from some natural consequences

Major and fundamental: Possibility of pregnancy Contraception – against conception Backup contraception – abortion

Most traditional morality is accepted Ecology Nutrition Not smoking Condemnation of greed Lust, greed, pride, sloth, gluttony, envy, wrath

CURE? Repent

Recognize something is wrong and we need to turn

Metanoia – go beyond Fast

Willingly deprive yourself of something good to instill desire for greater good or appreciation for another good

Pray Speak to Truth, Goodness and Beauty – the one

true God Be a saint