Today's article is about moral relativism. "What is that??!!", you ask? Moral Relativism is defined by Wikipedia as
In philosophy, moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth; it is the opposite of moral absolutism. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences. An extreme relativist position might suggest that judging the moral or ethical judgments or acts of another person or group has no meaning, though most relativists propound a more limited version of the theory.Still confused?? That's ok. By reading that definition, I might be too. :)
So What Is Moral Relativism??
Here is another easier definition from Truthnet.org to wade through:
What is Moral Relativity: is the view that when it comes to questions of morality, there are no absolutes and no objective right or wrong; moral rules are merely personal preferences and/or the result of one’s cultural, sexual or ethnic orientation.Basically, it means that whatever is right for one person, is right, because of that person's position, or sometimes because of a person's society that they live in. For example, in moral relativism, if you steal a loaf of bread to feed your children, it is ok, and not really stealing, because you needed it. The end justified the means. It's also the school of thought that says "So long as it doesn't hurt anybody, it's ok." This is where the term "It's all relative" is used so often. In moral relativism, there is no absolute right and wrong, it's all just gray areas. It all depends upon the circumstances surrounding the action.
Does anyone else out there have a problem with this?! How can there be no absolute right and wrong if God has so clearly indicated that there is? And even in situations where a person will say "it's all relative", like in the situation above, if they are caught they will be punished. Because it IS wrong. Stealing is stealing, lying is lying, murder is murder (the killing of innocent people), and adultery is adultery. None of these is ok, no matter what justification is used. They are all morally wrong, and according to God, sins.
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. John 10:27 NKJV
So why is it then, that even Christ followers (myself sometimes included) will find ourselves using moral relativity to excuse our behaviors, especially idolatry? Why do we think that it is ok to have a love of money, when we KNOW without a doubt that that is a love of Mammon, and a form of idolatry? Why is it that we put our wants ahead of God's commands? Why is it that we will allow moral relativity? I pray, meditate on this today:
Righteous are You, O LORD,
And upright are Your judgments.
Your testimonies, which You have commanded,
Are righteous and very faithful.
My zeal has consumed me,
Because my enemies have forgotten Your words.
Your word is very pure;
Therefore Your servant loves it.
I am small and despised,
Yet I do not forget Your precepts.
Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness,
And Your law is truth.
Trouble and anguish have overtaken me,
Yet Your commandments are my delights.
The righteousness of Your testimonies is everlasting;
Give me understanding, and I shall live. Psalm 119:137-144 NKJV(emphasis mine)
No you're not the only one - this really bugs me too. Particularly when it is taught in public schools... "Do whatever feels right for you..." Um... not ok.
ReplyDeleteOne of the big reasons I will likely homeschool.
You're not the only two...
ReplyDeletePeople hate to be told that what they're doing is wrong. They think it's "wrong" of us to say that. What a hoot!
Sorry to be argumentative, but I don't think that's really relativism. God gives you an absolute standard of right and wrong, so that's as far as you need to look as Christians, but I don't think your argument is fair to relativists (yes, relativists can still talk about what's fair, because it's a standard of justice, not morality).
ReplyDelete"Basically, it means that whatever is right for one person, is right..."
Relativism doesn't imply that everyone has their own universal standard, it implies that there is no standard. That does not mean "everyone should do whatever they feel like" because "should" statements are moral statements, and relativists don't put any authority in moral statements.
"For example, in moral relativism, if you steal a loaf of bread to feed your children, it is ok, and not really stealing, because you needed it."
Saying that something is not universal is not the same as saying that it's nonsense. This is a difficult dilemma in Christian ethics as well as secular: it's unfortunate for children to starve and it's unfortunate when property rights aren't respected. I would hardly say it's "ok" to steal in this case any more than I'd say it's "ok" to let your children starve.