Sunday, July 05, 2020
Relativism: There are no moral facts
If relativism is true, that means that there are no moral facts, and no means no. That applies to serial murder as well as to premarital sex. NO statement about what ought or ought not to be done can be objectively true or false. ALL of them are relative either to personal preference, or to societal preference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I've been mulling this over for a couple of weeks wondering what to say in response. A lot depends on how we understand 'moral fact'. I won't attempt a definition but the following may point to an understanding.
1. No moral facts at all? I would think that moral relativism finds a plurality of moral facts varying across time and place. It perhaps finds no universal moral facts but some come very close to universality.
2. No moral statement objectively true? I would have thought a moral statement S relativised to a culture C and time T could be objectively true. It just means that S is part of the moral climate in that culture at that time. So (S in C at T) is a moral fact.
3. Personal or societal preference? The notion of a 'personal morality' rather like a 'private language' makes no sense. Morality is essentially a social phenomenon. 'Preference' is too weak and inconsequential. Nothing much comes of my preferring coffee over tea. But my moral formation affects my whole life. Real consequences.
"I would think that moral relativism finds a plurality of moral facts varying across time and place."
No, there can be only one truth and that is yours. There may plurality of views, but we can't say they are objective or that are all true to me or anyone else (that becomes a contradiction).
"It perhaps finds no universal moral facts but some come very close to universality." The very concept of universal moral facts is absent from relativism and should be not be considered. That some truths seem more common does not make them universally relavent.
"I would have thought a moral statement S relativised to a culture C and time T could be objectively true." No,it can not otherwise you have disproved relativism.
"So (S in C at T) is a moral fact." Not objectively at any account.
Post a Comment