Relativism - A truly interesting discussion

[mikkel_the_dane]

Thats not relevant RS. Its not a logical contradiction. I hope you try and understand.

A logical contradiction is something like a square triangle.

No, it is at the same local time and space in the same sense and not. That is also the limit, because at different local time and space it can be a different sense that the first one.

 

[firedragon]

No, it is at the same local time and space in the same sense and not. That is also the limit, because at different local time and space it can be a different sense that the first one.

Good God.

There is an old idiomatic story people narrate.

Question: Where are you going?
Answer: I have coconuts in my bag.

Absolutely irrelevant.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Good God.

There is an old idiomatic story people narrate.

Question: Where are you going?
Answer: I have coconuts in my bag.

Absolutely irrelevant.

Yeah, you are the the source of that. Now do an actual analysis of same, similar and/or different sense. time and space.

 

[firedragon]

Yeah, you are the the source of that. Now do an actual analysis of same, similar and/or different sense. time and space.

Nope.

 

[viole]

Well. Relativism can in a very very simplistic manner be read out as "no objectivity".

This is a whole world of full of various relativist branches ranging from ethics, human rights, religion, social sciences, cultural studies, human resource management to values. Some people argue for objectivity knowing relativism maybe because of duty or an ought, and the same thing will apply to relativists in the vice versa scenario.

What is your position, why and what is your source of knowledge?

Relativism is conditional.

So, consider the following:

1) Raping and killing little children for fun is wrong
2) Banning gays from marrying is wrong

So, before I answer to your question, do you put both claims at the same moral level?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Nimos]

Thats a reference to ethics. Maybe even problems in consciousness. Wow, That can of worms will kill us all.

I can say one thing though. Subjective experiences does not mean an objective system does not exist. And it would also depend on "is it okay".

Sorry what do you mean?

 

[metis]

But this is also a question on ethics. Objectivity and subjectivity in the question of ethics is a little more than that.

As I have a "naturalist" bent, which applies in this case that I am willing to accept what is even if I don't like it, as quantum mechanics tells us that not all that's we think is actually is. Q.M. defies coventional cause & effect physics, which also tells me that we have to be careful in what we may assume no matter how illogical it may appear to be at the outset.

Also, if we apply the concept of "maya" (Buddhist & Hindu definition), our perceptions can often be flawed because of how we may process them.

 

[firedragon]

As I have a "naturalist" bent, which applies in this case that I am willing to accept what is even if I don't like it, as quantum mechanics tells us that not all that's we think is actually is. Q.M. defies coventional cause & effect physics, which also tells me that we have to be careful in what we may assume no matter how illogical it may appear to be at the outset.

Also, if we apply the concept of "maya" (Buddhist & Hindu definition), our perceptions can often be flawed because of how we may process them.

Maya? Hmm. Lets say in Buddhism, what does Maya mean?

 

[Nakosis]

Well. Relativism can in a very very simplistic manner be read out as "no objectivity".

This is a whole world of full of various relativist branches ranging from ethics, human rights, religion, social sciences, cultural studies, human resource management to values. Some people argue for objectivity knowing relativism maybe because of duty or an ought, and the same thing will apply to relativists in the vice versa scenario.

What is your position, why and what is your source of knowledge?

I don't believe the universe is relative, however I believe consciousness creates the illusion of relativity. IOW, our experience of the universe is a relative one even though the universe itself is not. Subjectivity is a mirage IMO, which I suspect will become less mysterious as we learn more about the mechanics of the brain.

My source of knowledge is success. What continues to works is knowledge that it continues to work. What has been shown to not work is knowledge of what doesn't. Knowledge is good only for as long as we can successfully use it.

Subjectivity is not particularly useful beyond the individual experience, firstly as a said, I see it as a mirage, secondly, while I can have knowledge of my own subjective experience, I can't have knowledge of yours.

 

[firedragon]

I don't believe the universe is relative, however I believe consciousness creates the illusion of relativity. IOW, our experience of the universe is a relative one even though the universe itself is not. Subjectivity is a mirage IMO, which I suspect will become less mysterious as we learn more about the mechanics of the brain.

My source of knowledge is success. What continues to works is knowledge that it continues to work. What has been shown to not work is knowledge of what doesn't. Knowledge is good only for as long as we can successfully use it.

Subjectivity is not particularly useful beyond the individual experience, firstly as a said, I see it as a mirage, secondly, while I can have knowledge of my own subjective experience, I can't have knowledge of yours.

Hmm. Interesting analysis. Thanks Nakosis.

 

[viole]

Maya? Hmm. Lets say in Buddhism, what does Maya mean?

Relativism is conditional.

So, consider the following:

1) Raping and killing little children for fun is wrong
2) Banning gays from marrying is wrong

So, before I answer to your question, do you put both claims at the same moral level?

Ciao

- viole

 

[metis]

Maya? Hmm. Lets say in Buddhism, what does Maya mean?

That what you "see" is not always the reality, largely because we process in-take through our own "attachments" [in our mindsets], which may distort the reality of whatever is.

For example, I may hear a song that may remind me of a very painfull event, such as in my case the Association's song "Cherish", so I for the longest time hated to hear it to the point that it would bring me to tears. Thus, the problem is not with the song itself but what I attached to it. Now I look at it differently as I associate with it as being a very pivotal transitional time period in my life that turned out beneficial to me in the long run. Still stirs the emotions up though in sort of a bitter-sweet way.

 

[firedragon]

That what you "see" is not always the reality, largely because we process in-take through our own "attachments" [in our mindsets], which may distort the reality of whatever is.

For example, I may hear a song that may remind me of a very painfull event, such as in my case the Association's song "Cherish", so I for the longest time hated to hear it to the point that it would bring me to tears. Thus, the problem is not with the song itself but what I attached to it. Now I look at it differently as I associate with it as being a very pivotal transitional time period in my life that turned out beneficial to me in the long run. Still stirs the emotions up though in sort of a bitter-sweet way.

No Metis. Thats not what Maya means. Maya is deception. When a sociopath pretends to be a nice guy and lures women with his bogus personality, that is a Maya. The concept of Maya in the Mahayana Buddhism (not in therawadha) is the deception created by your lust or lets say you madness for money. Its a dirty, bad thing.

 

[viole]

I'm not claiming any knowledge, I'm offering a point of view.

What little I do claim to know about anything, I can offer sources for, but that didn't seem to me to be the point of your original question.

Cool

So, consider the following:

1) Raping and killing little children for fun is wrong
2) Banning gays from marrying is wrong

Do you think that those two have the same ethical value, according to your point of view?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Hmm. Interesting analysis. Thanks Nakosis.

zzzz

Ciao

- viole

 

[Nakosis]

Relativism is conditional.

So, consider the following:

1) Raping and killing little children for fun is wrong
2) Banning gays from marrying is wrong

So, before I answer to your question, do you put both claims at the same moral level?

Ciao

- viole

I don't.
I'll tell you why. Children need greater protection than marrying adults.
Also not a big fan of the institute of marriage.

 

[firedragon]

I don't.
I'll tell you why. Children need greater protection than marrying adults.
Also not a big fan of the institute of marriage.

Out of curiosity, why do you not like the institution of marriage?

 

[viole]

I don't.
I'll tell you why. Children need greater protection than marrying adults.
Also not a big fan of the institute of marriage.

Ergo, moral claims are relative to you. There is no absolute book telling you what is wright and wrong, Right?
Why are you the only one replying to this, despite theists having opening it? Apart from you having balls, and the others having none, I can't really say.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Out of curiosity, why do you not like the institution of marriage?

zzz.
How about addressing my findings, you "metaphysical" loser

Ciao

- viole

 

[osgart]

Relativism is conditional.

So, consider the following:

1) Raping and killing little children for fun is wrong
2) Banning gays from marrying is wrong

So, before I answer to your question, do you put both claims at the same moral level?

Ciao

- viole

Both are morally severe violations absolutely to reject and detestable. 1 is more severe than 2.

Moral relativism denies moral facts.