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

  • @FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    139 months ago

    All 3 would receive a negative response in the last 100 years in different parts of the world. Hell there are plenty of places currently where women can’t vote, slavery is a thing and the government isn’t working toward a better society. Those places wouldn’t exist if those people thought it was morally wrong. Objective morality is definitely not a thing.

    • @100_percent_a_bot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -19 months ago

      The “truths” picked here are just pretty terrible to make that point. There’s for example one kind of slavery that people are usually fine with: children are to some extent the slaves of their parents. They have to do what they say, have no freedom of where they want to live and should they run away, the police will return them to their owners. Oh and kids can’t vote either and roughly half of them are female.

    • balderdashOP
      link
      fedilink
      -29 months ago

      That’s exactly the point. For example, people used to think chattel slavery in the US was morally acceptable because they viewed black people as inferior. But today we would say that black people are not inferior and that they were mistaken. The moral relativist would say that slavery was okay to do back then because that’s what the people agreed on. Do you still agree with the moral relativist?

      • @FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        19 months ago

        I agree that morals are relative considering there are a ton of people who still believe black people are inferior and also places with slavery.

        Something can be morally objective if every single person in the world believes it but I can’t think of a single example of that.