Unconscious as it presumably is to many, cherished absolutes frequently conflict with one another making it problematic to emphatically uphold them all. Doublethink, as George Orwell termed this. The notion that one should avoid “picking and choosing” morality in accordance with his personal preferences is ultimately unavoidable because of this.
Do you believe in the absolute ideal of mercy and forgiveness or do you believe in the absolute ideal of perfect judgment? Where must forgiveness end and judgment begin? One can not uphold both absolutely. Most commonly, people uphold varying degrees of each rendering them morally relative.
Do you believe in the absolute ideal of mercy and forgiveness or do you believe in the absolute ideal of perfect judgment? Where must forgiveness end and judgment begin? One can not uphold both absolutely. Most commonly, people uphold varying degrees of each rendering them morally relative.
For instance, should a man reap what he sows? If this view is held absolutely, then crippled retards should be left to reap what they sow. Perhaps we should help them? Well then, at what point should we stop helping another and simply leave him to reap what he has sown? How crippled and retarded must one be to afford our help?
Similarly, how capitalistic or socialistic should our society be? You don't advocate one OR the other, do you? More than likely you advocate a combination or balance of the 2. What does this mean? It means a thousand things to a thousand people! Once again, this is the fundamental conflict of all societies!
Are you starting to see the purpose of attempting to recruit people to ONE ideology or religion, all of which are likely nothing but arbitrary conventions? What purpose am I speaking of? To provide society with a cohesive moral framework in which to make difficult decisions!
The problem is, morality becomes relative even if pondered in the slightest! This is why people within the same religion and/or political ideology so frequently disagree.....because the solutions to our most difficult problems are ultimately relegated to nothing but (oftentimes opposing) personal preferences!
See link below for further corollary on the contradiction inherent in moral absolutes:
Firmly Planted In Mid-Air
http://kurtsthoughtemporium.blogspot.com/2009/07/firmly-planted-in-mid-air.html
Are you starting to see the purpose of attempting to recruit people to ONE ideology or religion, all of which are likely nothing but arbitrary conventions? What purpose am I speaking of? To provide society with a cohesive moral framework in which to make difficult decisions!
The problem is, morality becomes relative even if pondered in the slightest! This is why people within the same religion and/or political ideology so frequently disagree.....because the solutions to our most difficult problems are ultimately relegated to nothing but (oftentimes opposing) personal preferences!
See link below for further corollary on the contradiction inherent in moral absolutes:
Firmly Planted In Mid-Air
http://kurtsthoughtemporium.blogspot.com/2009/07/firmly-planted-in-mid-air.html
No comments:
Post a Comment