[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

What is moral relativism?

Firstly, to understand what we are talking about let’s get into what moral relativism actually is. Followers of moral relativism put forward the notion of a universal truth that there are no universal truths. Paradoxical.

Humour aside, the specific definition itself is:

Moral relativism is the idea that there is no universal or absolute set of moral principles, that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.

Going further we have cultural relativism which states:

Moral stands are culturally defined, no one cultures set of morals/laws is better than another and not judging a culture to our own standards of what is right or wrong, strange or normal.

Let’s start by picking apart cultural relativism first. I live in England so I will be referring to my standpoint from the opinion of English culture and laws. Although this country has its own problems, huge corruption, useless politicians, and so on. Even with its flaws, I do believe this country still has a hugely morally superior standing compared with many other nations/cultures around the world and I will unpack my reasonings why I believe this.

Should we accept cultural relativism to be true and that just because we were born in one nation doesn’t mean we shouldn’t condemn the actions/beliefs of other cultures, then what we would call an absolute atrocity and a crime against humanity would actually be our own subjective interpretation.

China is a great example of how not to operate a free and loving society.

When China begun Subjugating, imprisoning and torturing Falun gong practitioners, harvesting their organs and  working them to death in labour camps, Cultural relativism would have all this be acceptable behaviour and something that perhaps the UK should look into for people practicing yoga here perhaps?

Part of the argument as to why Chinese officials took the action they did was because the popularity of Falun Gong was becoming so huge that the numbers of practitioners was out growing the communist party.

Was this way of handling the hugely growing popularity of the Falun gong movement in China the morally correct way? Was it the best way for the authorities to handle the situation? Could there have been a more diplomatic approach that would have worked out in favour of both the people of China and those practicing Falun gong?

What if the number of people practicing Yoga in the UK became so large, the people organised themselves into a peaceful political party and begun to run for positions of political power? Would the UK government then be justified in murdering, prisoning, torturing everyone practicing yoga?

Or would the best approach be one of ‘fair play’ allowing those who gain popularity with the people the fair shot at running to be elected as we have the choice with our vote, right? Well we should, how corrupt the system here is again another topic for another article.

Here we can see, clearly, what is the morally superior way for a society to handle itself and what in the long term leads to a society of greater harmony, happiness and health.

As Jordan Peterson accurately states:

There are many ways to interpret the world, but very few that interpret it optimally.

Although it seems the values of what makes England, England are being eroded, the counter reaction to this is that people are beginning to become more patriotic, remembering what this country stands for and what its roots are. Not all hope is lost!

Our law was built upon common law, and although our court system and law system has evolved over time and using common law now to be successful in court is a more complex endeavour than it seems, although possible.

Our foundation was built upon the fact that every man and woman, matters. You have value, you have a spark of divinity inside that is meaningful. God’s law essentially.

We don’t have to ascribe to the many outdated parts of religious dogma to take away the core of good that it was all built upon. The idea that there is higher divine principles, that you have rights, and just by being born and being alive this magical thing we call life has huge intrinsic value!

Now we can Segway nicely into moral relativism on an individual level.

Moral Relativism on a personal level

There are only so many ways we can treat people that lead to harmonious interactions and sustained healthy relationships. Steal from the people around you and see how long it takes for them to start to dislike you. Cheat and lie to others and see how long it takes before they change the way they treat you and lose trust in you. If everyone were to steal, cheat, lie all of the time we wouldn’t have any form of a functioning society.

Basic things like trusting that the person driving the other side of the road will continue to do so even though there is nothing but a tiny white line on the floor separating the two of you is an example of having faith the other is trained in how to use a vehicle and wont just suddenly decide to drive on the other side of the road. There is a level of trust involved.

Should everyone suddenly act like nothing has absolutely no value, including themselves society would degrade into chaos, anarchy and become an unworkable hell like society very quickly. Moral relativism gives people an excuse to skimp out on shadow work.

Unfortunately I believe we could see a slow progression into that kind of a world, because in many ways people are losing their connection to God and something higher beyond themselves. This could be reversed however, if enough people evolve in the right direction.

Many people in England now are not religious, rejecting the former belief systems of our ancestors. in some ways I believe this is a good thing because much of it was based on fear and created as such because a lot of people where barely above animals and needed a simple explanation on what good and bad is.

As we are intellectually evolving as a species, simple fear based dogma is not enough to satisfy our minds as the best way to live and it makes sense to reject that. What’s missing though for many is a higher understanding of the way this reality works that can go beyond the limitations of religion.

Spirituality itself can be the bridge here but then its defining exactly what that is, what it means to spiritually evolve and to still retain a moral framework that allows for functioning, healthy relationships and a functioning healthy society.

We don’t need to reject God to reject religion, we don’t need religion to get in the way of our connection to God. We don’t need churches to pray, although the energy might be stronger.

So how to get enough people on board, agreeing what is right and wrong when there is no religious framework holding it all together?

Personally I believe the only way is up. With that I mean we have to evolve spiritually, and even though the definition of what it means to be spiritual can be open to interpretation I believe actually spiritually evolving itself is something than is as objective as the colours of the rainbow and the numbers in mathematics.

Spiritual evolution in itself is a huge topic. To read more you can go here, here and here.

 

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]