Is it abuse?

[deeptubes]

When I was 10, my parents made me bite a chunk out of a bar of soap and chew it up for lying to them. It was Caress.

 

[MatticusMania]

Then the lesson was learned, IMO

Ha! If thats what they were trying to teach me, they failed big time.

 

[CapnSev]

Put that bar of soap in a tube sock and we'll talk some punishment.

 

[LiquidMidnight]

That presumes a belief in relativistic morality.

No, it doesn't. Social construction is not a normative value judgment. It's simply a theoretical explanation of how culture is created and recreated.

Society may have differing opinions on specific acts, but I would argue that does not change their inherint morality.

What is inherent morality? Morality is given validity through our system of philosophy. I reject the idea of an inherent morality because it assumes some sort of intangible essence.

Even when the culture endorses slavery or pedophilia etc they're still wrong.

I agree that those things are wrong, but as alluded to above, I have the priveledge of having access to Western philosophical thinking to justify a position that those things are wrong rather than taking the intellectual dodge that they are self-evidently wrong.

 

[spade2you]

Any Lux or Life Buoy fans? Palmolive?

-Ralphie

...but Life Buoy, BLECHK!

 

[Lee Moses]

No, it doesn't. Social construction is not a normative value judgment. It's simply a theoretical explanation of how culture is created and recreated.



What is inherent morality? Morality is given validity through our system of philosophy. I reject the idea of an inherent morality because it assumes some sort of intangible essence.



I agree that those things are wrong, but as alluded to above, I have the priveledge of having access to Western philosophical thinking to justify a position that those things are wrong rather than taking the intellectual dodge that they are self-evidently wrong.

So really, in your view, there is no action truly wrong. It is only when consensus is reached that an action is wrong does it become wrong.

So, since the consensus in Germany was that killing Jews was a justified action, the Holocaust was not wrong?

 

[pflash4001]

Uh-Oh...

 

[sloasdaylight]

Post #66 and Godwin rears his head.

 

[vin*tone]

Waterboarding is more effective.

 

[curbowkid]

Is it or isnt it abuse?

I blame ziltoid.

 

[macaroni tony]

Put that bar of soap in a tube sock and we'll talk some punishment.

you're late son! Page 1 post 9!

 

[macaroni tony]

I agree that those things are wrong, but as alluded to above, I have the priveledge of having access to Western philosophical thinking to justify a position that those things are wrong rather than taking the intellectual dodge that they are self-evidently wrong.

So....are you saying you do "believe in" relative morality, and that Western philosophical thinking is relatively the best one?

 

[4dog]

And so it begins.........

 

[Ziltoid]

In a world without men, would there be right and wrong?

 

[macaroni tony]

^ Git oota here you! Quit makin trouble!

No way am I getting too deep into this one...my post was just out of curiosity

 

[DwaynieAD]

i got my ass beat with a belt, i wasn't abused. where's my spongebob get over urself meme

 

[Ziltoid]

Objective morality only exists within a framework that sets the standards by which you can measure or assess human acts.

Agreeing on the framework is the difficult thing.1​

1​Copy-pasted from the interwebz​

 

[LiquidMidnight]

So really, in your view, there is no action truly wrong. It is only when consensus is reached that an action is wrong does it become wrong.

So, since the consensus in Germany was that killing Jews was a justified action, the Holocaust was not wrong?

Umm, no. Godwin's Law aside, what is so hard understanding what I'm saying?

First, on the topic of social construction: I am not making a normative value judgment. Social construction is not an ethical position. It is an ontological paradigm that informs certain schools of social science. You are all trying to talk ethics. I'm talking sociology and anthropology. An anthropologist who writes an ethnography on a group of people and how they negotiate certain folkways, ethics, and norms within a group is not necessarily making a value judgment on those things; he or she is just reporting how that group negotiates those folkways, ethics, and norms. If you remember correctly, the original question I responded to asked how different ideas of right and wrong change over time. I gave a quick and dirty guide to constructionism; nothing more.

Second, with regard to my second point. I'm not saying morality comes from consensus. I'm saying that morality is not automatically self-evident or based upon any inarticulable essence, but must be understood through a system of philosophy that is intellectually defensible.

Anymore straw men I have to deal with in this thread?

 

[Balog]

I understand your point, I agree with the first although not your application of it, and reject the second. Doesn't agree != doesn't understand.

 

[Ziltoid]

^ Git oota here you! Quit makin trouble!

No way am I getting too deep into this one...my post was just out of curiosity

You know better than to ask