Quote:
Originally Posted by VampireBunBun
The statement, "There are no absolutes," is itself an absolute. The most you can say is, "There might not be absolutes." You can't actually deny the possibility of their existence without stating an absolute, making the whole statement self-defeating.
|
That's a logical assumption and really depends on you definition of Absolute truth and of truth, and while that assumption is true from a logical perspective it doesn't really mean that in reality absolutes actually exist.
Using
Basically it boils down to a common method to prove something logically- "Let's assume there are no absolute truths, since that statement is in itself an absolute truth, we have a contradiction and so absolute truth must exist |
logic to prove the existence of absolute truth is flawed due to the fact that logic is inherently based on the assumption that absolute truth exists (and defines several absolute truths itself).
But it doesn't really matter, since even if we take that statement by the letter, it doesn't point to the fact that any other absolute truth exist except the absolute truth "there exists an absolute truth", let alone the existence of absolute morals.
Quote:
So, you are saying that it was perfectly okay for slave masters to have non-consensual sex with their slaves? You'd be fine with that?
|
Yes that is what I'm saying, on the assumption that we are referring to a society where slavery was in itself morally okay, for example ancient Egypt or other biblical realms.
Would I be fine with that? it depends on the situation, I think that as a master in those societies, I would probably be quite fine with that, as a slave I don't know and can't answer that since my social upbringing is too different from what we perceive those societies to be.
But that's not really relevant, whether or not I'll be fine with it has no bearing on if it's morally right or wrong, I could be fine with stealing from babies, that doesn't mean it's morally right.