Have you read “The abolition of man”? Your thoughts are very similar to what the author describes in that book. I too experience it to be larger now than ever before in my life.
The obvious counterside of that coin is: without moral relativism, one would place their culture above others. Something that’s seen as an evil in the zeitgeist.
but only Westerners will believe they’re not making mistakes and being unwise and immoral because they’re perennial fencesitters
I think you might be having a “grass is greener” moment.
Hey! I haven’t but the wiki says “Lewis goes on to warn readers about the consequences of doing away with ideas of objective value. It defends “man’s power over nature” as something worth pursuing but criticizes the use of it to debunk values, the value of science itself being among them. The title of the book then, is taken to mean that moral relativism threatens the idea of humanity itself.” so yeah, definitely.
And, as I see it, some ideologies (“cultures” felt a bit too big of a word) are objectively ‘better’ (as in, they allow the largest amount of people, perhaps even everyone, to live with each other happily, healthily, peacefully and lovingly) than others. I mean, if one take can be better than another, a collection of takes can also be better than another, right? In fact, denying that is nothing but another expression of current Western ideology. I’m telling you, there’s such a thing as objective rights and wrongs that people outside of the Western sphere of influence believe in (in degrees though). In their case, the problems lie in an excess in restrictiveness and unfair treatment/punishment due to it. But I think it’s a better starting point than to deny it all, throwing away the baby with the bathwater.
Have you read “The abolition of man”? Your thoughts are very similar to what the author describes in that book. I too experience it to be larger now than ever before in my life.
The obvious counterside of that coin is: without moral relativism, one would place their culture above others. Something that’s seen as an evil in the zeitgeist.
I think you might be having a “grass is greener” moment.
Hey! I haven’t but the wiki says “Lewis goes on to warn readers about the consequences of doing away with ideas of objective value. It defends “man’s power over nature” as something worth pursuing but criticizes the use of it to debunk values, the value of science itself being among them. The title of the book then, is taken to mean that moral relativism threatens the idea of humanity itself.” so yeah, definitely.
And, as I see it, some ideologies (“cultures” felt a bit too big of a word) are objectively ‘better’ (as in, they allow the largest amount of people, perhaps even everyone, to live with each other happily, healthily, peacefully and lovingly) than others. I mean, if one take can be better than another, a collection of takes can also be better than another, right? In fact, denying that is nothing but another expression of current Western ideology. I’m telling you, there’s such a thing as objective rights and wrongs that people outside of the Western sphere of influence believe in (in degrees though). In their case, the problems lie in an excess in restrictiveness and unfair treatment/punishment due to it. But I think it’s a better starting point than to deny it all, throwing away the baby with the bathwater.
You’ll want to read it :) I wholely agree, and given the context C.S. Lewis wrote it in, I think it’s quite important today.
And then I shall, kind stranger. Thanks for the recommendation! 😊