I would have used a lot more words, but that’s exactly what I wanted to say.
Comment on Philosophy meme
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 8 months ago
This isn’t the contradiction you make it to be. Patrick, in the first three slides, is just repeating the group’s xx
Jay@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
spacesweedkid27@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I sadly already made me 200w comment before reading the comments 🥲
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
I would have just said Patrick’s opinions are subjective not objective
balderdash9@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
If you really think chattel slavery was morally acceptable for the slave owners just because there was a group consensus that the slaves were inferior… then I’m willing to let you go on thinking that
hydroel@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I feel like you’re intentionally missing your own point.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 8 months ago
You’re being downvoted because that was clearly bad faith. Slavery doesn’t have group consensus among all involved, not even all non-slaves.
balderdash9@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
The point is that slavery was seen as morally acceptable at some time and the moral relativist is forced to say that that means slavery was okay during that time. Most people here want to be moral relativists but they don’t want to accept its consequences.
GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de 8 months ago
I think you don’t quite understand moral relativism.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I don’t think the slaves ever saw slavery as acceptable.
poplargrove@lemmy.world 8 months ago
OP worded it badly, but you should be arguing against what they probably mean, not a strawman. Consensus obviously cant mean every single person agreeing, its about what the widespread view in the culture is.
So, how would you reply? Was slavery correct in the past because thats what the cultural view was? If a society is mysognist are they right?
Cryophilia@lemmy.world 8 months ago
suppose slavery was condone by some culture. Wouldnt that have made it moral?
By definition, yes.
Southern whites in the pre Civil War period considered slavery to be a moral good.
Other cultures disagreed, to the point that this particular culture was all but destroyed.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 8 months ago
How’s freshman Intro. to Philisophy treatin’ ya?
benni@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Honest question: if a person living in the west in the 21st century thinks they should have the right to take people of a different race as their own personal slaves, do you think there is no basis to call this person immoral? The best we can do is say that this person is incompatible with the time and place they are in?
Honytawk@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
We in the west have a basis to call this person immoral.
The places where slavery is legal do not have that basis.
HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Ask the slaves that lol. That argument is moot because it relies on legitimizing the oppression committed by slavers by not seeing enslaved people as part of the population/group. Their history was not recorded the same way the slaver’s history was, yet they were still humans that thought about, talked about, and theorized about morality too. You don’t get to claim to know the group consensus of a past society just because slavers used oppression to erase the viewpoints of those who disagreed.
i_ben_fine@lemmy.one 8 months ago
That’s a very good point. Moral relativism can be true and oppressors can still be bad.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 8 months ago
a person living in the west in the 21st century
This qualifier alone shows that “objective” moral truth is defined only by where/when you live. You’re also showing your own modern western bias here.
charliespider@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Came here to say this exact thing