Not sure why this got removed from 196lemmy…blahaj.zone but it would be real nice if moderation on Lemmy gave you some sort of notification of what you did wrong. Like an automatic DM or something

  • @Cryophilia
    link
    11 year ago

    I’m going to use a technique that I frequently use when discussing philosophy, to cut through the smokescreen of bullshit. Ignore your preconceived definitions. They don’t matter. Instead of “cultural relativism”, whatever you think that is, we are going to discuss “what the general population thinks of when they hear the term ‘cultural relativism’”. For short, I am going to call this Skywalker Theory. No academic has ever written about Skywalker Theory. There are no papers to reference. There’s no books, no dissertations, no letters. Skywalker Theory exists solely in the minds of people who have never gone beyond Intro to Philosophy.

    Skywalker Theory says:

    • The idea of an objective “good” is impossible since different groups believe different things at different times. We believe in Good and Bad, but it’s really just the result of cultural conditioning.

    Any time your see “Cultural Relativism”, replace that with Skywalker Theory for the purposes of this discussion.

    Skywalker Theory is not fleshed out. It’s really just a premise. There’s a lot that is up for discussion. Skywalker Theory may resemble established academic philosophies like nihilism, but it is not nihilism. It doesn’t have the baggage of all the various discussions and terms and definitions and writings that the philosophy of nihilism has. You can say “nihilism says that [x]” and reference previous writings and scenarios and logical conclusions. You cannot say that about Skywalker Theory. There’s nothing to reference.

    • Poplar?
      link
      11 year ago

      I’m not really sure what to reply with.

      “Skywalker theory” (so far identical to error theory) isnt what the post or the discussion is about. The meme is pretty clear it is about cultural relativism and clear about what it means by cultural relativism.

      If you want to bring your own objection to moral realism, sure, but it makes little sense hijacking the definition to mean something entirely different and being unhappy this wasnt what the term others were using meant.

      • @Cryophilia
        link
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Wrong. The OP never mentions ANY specific philosophical theory. People commenting are clearly talking about little-r relativism, the popular definition, the one I gave, not the Relativism or Realism or Nihilism or whatever else “experts” have loaded down with jargon and tangents and straw men over the decades.

        Skywalker theory strips you of philosophical tricks. You have to talk about the central premise, there is nothing more. Skywalker Theory is BY DEFINITION what we are talking about.

        Modern philosophy is so weighted down, it’s almost entirely a discussion about terms rather than ideas. Skywalker Theory undoes that.

        OP says, “the truth of moral judgments is relative to group consensus”. That’s it. Discuss that, and just that.

        OP (and the ensuing discussion) does not say “there is an objective Truth but it is whatever a group of people happens to believe at the time, especially if it’s something that I personally believe is Bad”, because that’s an absurd and contradictory statement. That absurd statement is not a part of Skywalker Theory. No one cares if it’s part of some other theory, that’s a tangent. We’re talking about Skywalker Theory.

        See how it works?

        You can’t say “aha, your are clearly referring to the philosophy of fish guts, and as we all know the famous Professor Poopybutt demonstrated in 1803 that a belief in fish gut philosophy requires one to break one’s own legs.” No. Stop. We are not getting bogged down in a useless conversation about some crazy bullshit. We are not talking about fishgut theory, we are talking about Skywalker Theory, and Skywalker Theory has no other sources to reference than the premise given in this post, and the ensuing discussion.