Moral Equivalency & Moral Relativism

About: Moral Equivalency

The ideas that just because 2 parties in a war are killing people & braking things does not mean that they both should be judged equally.

Moral Relativism

Moral Equivalency

Comments

Mark de LA says
Even Lanny Davis, a former or present Clintonista admits that "Bigotry and hate aren't just for right-wingers anymore."

here in a WSJ editorial.

Seth says
I keep trying to understand what you are saying with ...

The ideas that just because 2 parties in a war are killing people & braking things does not mean that they both should be judged equally.

... but so far i can't parse an understanding of you stance out of your sentence. To me the idea of "moral equivalence" suggests, for example, that if a Isralie bomb blows up a innocent civilian, and a Hezbollah bomb blows up a innocent civilian, that both actions are morally equivalent. If they are to be judged not morally equivalent, then one act must be contained in a wider context which justifies it to some group. Moral relivance says that any group is just as valid as any other group. Do you dissent from those assumptions? What are you really saying in this item?

Mark de LA says
I went to the Wikipedia the last time you brushed off the term moral equivalency as just a neo-con buzzword. Because 2 groups are fighting against each other does not make them equivalently evil. In the Western World we acknowledge self-defense as justification for killing someone. In other words the context for the behavior is part of the whole picture.
I don't see how any one group of people is just as valid as any other except in extreme abstraction.

Seth says

M 2006-08-08 10:53:56 4107

I went to the Wikipedia the last time you brushed off the term moral equivalency as just a neo-con buzzword.

And did you catch that the Wikipedia article is consistent with my claim that this is just a derogatory term to be used in political debate ? You don't need to take Wikipedia's definition to convince yourself, take a look at how it is being used google moral equivalency.

Because 2 groups are fighting against each other does not make them equivalently evil. In the Western World we acknowledge self-defense as justification for killing someone. In other words the context for the behavior is part of the whole picture.

I have no problems with that.

I don't see how any one group of people is just as valid as any other except in extreme abstraction.

Yes it is hard to stand outside of the groups in which you identify. But ethics attempts to do just that. Yet the only one who can stand outside all human social groups is Nature herself. But of course no real group can stand on that moral high ground. Hence inevitable all partisan ethics must fail. Sure brings to mind that ancient religious wisdom: "Judge not least ye be judged".

Mark de LA says

source: ... Yet the only one who can stand outside all human social groups is Nature herself. But of course no real group can stand on that moral high ground. Hence inevitable all partisan ethics must fail. Sure brings to mind that ancient religious wisdom: "Judge not least ye be judged".

...Mother nature has no ethics & no moral high ground. Ethos is demonstrated by intelligence, virtue, and goodwill - none of which Mother Nature has. Yes, the Golden Rule applies to judgement as well as most every aspect of human life. But, war is outside that as it would dissappear of it's own weight having already violated the Golden Rule.

Mark de LA says
Yep, I read Wikipedia's comment. I also understand the meaning of words. I don't hold the terrorist Hezbos in the same high regard that I hold the founders of America. Sorry, they are NOT morally equivalent to eachother!

Mark de LA says

seth 2006-08-08 11:30:16 4107

Somehow i think this is relivant to this node ...

source: The Reverse Cow Girl

but if you don't think so, just delete it.

Yep it really belongs in a cartoon. It has some amount of humor in it

Which one are your aligned with?

Seth says

M 2006-08-08 11:35:16 4107

Yep, I read Wikipedia's comment. I also understand the meaning of words. I don't hold the terrorist Hezbos in the same high regard that I hold the founders of America. Sorry, they are NOT morally equivalent to eachother!

Yes, i know, it is a difficult thing to do. Nor do i claim that i can do it. But can you at least conceive of a perspective from which it is possible ?

Mark de LA says
non-sequitur:

seth 2006-08-08 11:54:37 4107

M 2006-08-08 11:48:08 4107

...Mother nature has no ethics & no moral high ground.

Then neither does God.

Watch Wild Kingdom or some other Mother Nature series on TV & tell me if the animals eating eachother shows any moral high ground except the survival of the fitest. There is nothing moral involved there. Unless & if you just say that God is Mother Nature.

Seth says

M 2006-08-08 11:48:08 4107

...Mother nature has no ethics & no moral high ground.

Then neither does God.

Mark de LA says

seth 2006-08-08 11:51:40 4107

M 2006-08-08 11:35:16 4107

Yes, i know, it is a difficult thing to do. Nor do i claim that i can do it. But can you at least conceive of a perspective from which it is possible ?

Maybe God.

Seth says

M 2006-08-08 12:26:40 4107

non-sequitur:

seth 2006-08-08 11:54:37 4107

M 2006-08-08 11:48:08 4107

...Mother nature has no ethics & no moral high ground.

Then neither does God.

Me thinks that you have a rather more narrow conception of nature than do i ... mine does not come from watching Wild Kingdom.

Unless & if you just say that God is Mother Nature.

Mark de LA says

seth 2006-08-08 12:34:40 4107

M 2006-08-08 12:26:40 4107

non-sequitur:

seth 2006-08-08 11:54:37 4107

M 2006-08-08 11:48:08 4107

...Mother nature has no ethics & no moral high ground.

Then neither does God.

Me thinks that you have a rather more narrow conception of nature than do i ... mine does not come from watching Wild Kingdom.

Unless & if you just say that God is Mother Nature.

'snot my only source - just one that proves my point. Try Hurricanes & floods & famines & volcanoes & global warming - all faces of Mother Nature - see if you can find the morality in it all

Seth says

M 2006-08-08 12:37:17 4107

'snot my only source - just one that proves my point. Try Hurricanes & floods & famines & volcanoes & global warming - all faces of Mother Nature - see if you can find the morality in it all

Do you believe that there is morality in God ?

Mark de LA says
God is NOT = Mother Nature. A hurricane will destroy a rich man as easily as a poor man. There are spiritual laws & there are material laws. Morality, IMHO, belongs to the spiritual domain. If one equates God to the Cosmic ALL then you have morality in God. Most people equate a god to anything powerful enough to whip their ass! Some teenagers think that a god is some dreamy rock & roll star. This node has fast outgrown it's original purpose & has taken a twist toward the airy-fairy.

Seth says
Well i think we are actually getting closer to some understanding of your stance regarding moral equivalence. You say: "If one equates God to the Cosmic ALL then you have morality in God" and i have no trouble with that. Now hang in there. Tell me ... from where does your "morality" come? Does it come from God? Does it come from "spiritual laws" ? Or does it come from your upbringing and your experiences?

Mark de LA says

M 2006-08-08 15:20:46 4107

I derive most of my morality from the Golden Rule. Some from the understanding of karma which one could blame on the parents. There was a giant AHA when I got the Golden Rule - whether I can blame that on God or not - who knows?

Moral Equivalency & Moral Relativism

About: Moral Equivalency

Tags

Comments

See Also