this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
228 points (88.5% liked)

Memes

45152 readers
2668 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 40 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Is it actually? As far as I'm aware, it doesn't really make any statements that anything is moral or immoral, nor is it a framework that could be used to determine such things by itself, more so a statement on the validity of such things. Or in other word, is it really a moral thesis, or is it a thesis about moral thesis?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago

Yeah I don't understand the point the meme is trying to make

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago

You're on the right track here. It's a metaethical claim, not a moral one.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

You could argue that moral relativism is a metaethical thesis and so is not straight away self-defeating. Even so, moral relativists often go on to claim that we shouldn't judge the moral acts of other cultures based on what we take to be universal moral standards. Because, get this, it would be wrong to do so.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not smart enough to understand anything in this conversation, but "Metaethical" seems like it would be a good metal band name

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Followed by Postmetaethical when they lose a member

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This sounds like Goedels theorem. How could a philosophy be consistent and have an opinion about every moral topic?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure morality would have the same problems with recursion that math has.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure it's the SAME but if there were a system of created ethics that were able to speak to everything and do so consistently.... Wouldn't we know?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Why would we? Ethics can be just as opaque as any other subject. It took us thousands of years to get economics, psychology, etc. to where they are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Yooo. You are onto something here.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

Is it that it's wrong or simply that it lacks proper context? Like if you're going to judge a culture you should learn the culture that seems obvious even without the arguments about morality