What do you say?

[dukefan1989]

What do you say to someone who says that all morality comes from one's culture? And when you try to explain how the Nazi's were wrong in what they did, they say that what the Nazi's did was justified because of the culture/enviroment the Nazi's lived in, allowed these acts. I find this reprehensible, but don't really know how to respond. They have actually went so far as to say that if the culture is okay with murder, then murder is morally acceptable. How would you respond?

[Kurieuo]

If they think murder is fine, then there is some moral dysfunction. Do nothing, just leave. Unless others are watching, in which case you can use them as a good example of what people are forced to believe if morality is only ever relative.

They could just sticking to their guns as they were not have a way out where they could keep their pride intact. In which case try to be more tactful in your approach and focus on agreeing with things that are actually wrong for all.

[dukefan1989]

Well, it's not that he believes murder is okay. He doesn't. And he makes that very clear. He believes that a person's culture is the creator of morality. If that culture says murder is morally acceptable, then it's acceptable.

To anyone who says morals are objective, he goes on to list examples where lying and stealing are okay. For example, he would ask if a person lied during the holocaust to save a Jewish family, would it be wrong to lie in that situation. I think he just doesn't want to concede the fact that morals are objective. I think I'm just going to back out of the discussion.

[Kurieuo]

Well, it's not that he believes murder is okay. He doesn't. And he makes that very clear. He believes that a person's culture is the creator of morality. If that culture says murder is morally acceptable, then it's acceptable.

Well, actually, the one thing he can not say is that he believes murder is or is not okay. He is amoral on murder since to him it can be both acceptable and unacceptable. What gives him the privilege to then choose one over the other? A matter of his personal taste? That is not morality, that is taste like preferring chocolate icecream over strawberry. His taste on murder might be that he does not like it, like he may not like broccoli or some other food, but his morality on murder is amoral.

To anyone who says morals are objective, he goes on to list examples where lying and stealing are okay. For example, he would ask if a person lied during the holocaust to save a Jewish family, would it be wrong to lie in that situation. I think he just doesn't want to concede the fact that morals are objective. I think I'm just going to back out of the discussion.

Get it onto a discussion of moral values. What moral values are being objectively used to justify stealing in some circumstances while not in others. Moral values dictate laws and what we view as morally acceptable. Moral actions can be shifted according to certain circumstances, while moral values such as trustworthiness, honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, loving are values we all tend to intuitively see a inherently good.

So why is stealing alright in some circumstances while not in others? A moral dilemma will exist in some cases precisely because moral values we intuitively embrace as real come into conflict with each other. When a moral dilemma is faced, we then attempt to work out which values are more important to make a decision. Is the right to life or caring for ones family enough to justify breaking a moral law such as stealing food which goes against the moral values inherent in respecting another person's property? I believe so. You notice this is not because morality is relative that this conflict is caused, but precisely because two moral values we hold as equally true and real come into conflict.

[JCSx2]

What do you say to someone who says that all morality comes from one's culture? And when you try to explain how the Nazi's were wrong in what they did, they say that what the Nazi's did was justified because of the culture/enviroment the Nazi's lived in, allowed these acts. I find this reprehensible, but don't really know how to respond. They have actually went so far as to say that if the culture is okay with murder, then murder is morally acceptable. How would you respond?

Even to this day there are Nazi survivors from the War that say what they did was wrong. Who ever you are talking to has issues for not wanting to accept responsibility for their actions and are looking for an out. Morality is not society thing or a evolution thing. We were programmed from day 1 to know right from wrong. Society getting lax on moral issues is just an excuse for them not to feel bad for doing what they know what is wrong

[Ashley]

It is the reason why all culture must live in God and no culture should go with atheism. All societies need a standard of ethics which undoubtedly must come from bible written by our Creator.

IT is aweful that ethics is to be set by political system; if the parliament debated if they should kill without cause, and prejudice swept through the debators resulting in a vote for killing, majority votes distort the righteousness; it just looks like ethical while in fact it is vile.

.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Well, what I would do is first realize that their belief that culture determines what is moral or immoral for us is backed up by presuppositions. If you have an atheist who thinks there is no God, just matter in motion, you can't get him to ever believe there is an objective moral standard while also being an atheist-they are inconsistent beliefs. The best you could do is listen to what he says, and point out how he contradicts himself. But, doing that, the farthest you can get is the person to consistently say nothing is right or wrong-which isn't where you want to end up most likely. You could also go and play with his emotions (find something he hates, like genocide, and he might have to admit that he can't help but say that's wrong), and he might wind up saying that he has no ground for morality, but he believes in it somehow. Simply put, the only way you can get him to think like a Christian (believe in objective moral values with an actual foundation) is to be a Christian. And you can't do that by yourself.

I'm rusty so I may need to clarify. But there's nothing wrong with that...right?