People Twitter

6423 readers

1713 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

702

An ethics professor at Cambridge talks about teaching ethics in 2025 (lemmy.world)

submitted 20 hours ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

135 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

But the point is that, if you follow moral relativism (which the hypothetical students in the post do, as they insist morality is relative), then you must acquiesce that cultures which hate queer people are valid and acceptable, because doing otherwise would not be moral relativism. Or, take another example, slavery. Is it okay for any culture to practice slavery?

And if you don't agree that it is valid and acceptable on a philosophical level, well, you can just follow a form moral universalism. Which is more appropriate if you do think some sets of morals are simply more ethical than others, such as, for example, not allowing slavery

It's not so much about whether different moral standards exist or not, but more whether different standards for morals in and of themselves are acceptable/ethical.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 4 hours ago

The fact that they didn't use "moral relativism" explicitly suggests to me that like most general philosophy classes, they are probably moral realists and the OP is just being cheeky about it, or legitimately for some reason completely unable to present moral realism as a subject of discussion.

I don't agree with your characterization of moral universalism here, but regardless it's clear that they are either bad at their job or posting for the memes because it's literally their job to be able to establish what a cohesive view would be and why that is important, so it's weird to act like clowning on their students for having a selfcontradictory view is anything but an admission of failure on their end.