Is Ethics Relative?

Man of Ethics

Gold Member
Feb 28, 2021
4,682
2,134
248
Different cultures, subcultures, and even individuals have different Ethical Standards at different times. In some places Slavery and in Ancient World even human sacrifice were acceptable.
 
Of course, ethics is based on external sources such as laws and codes of conducts. It is, by definition, relative to the society that generates the sources.
I guess so. We may consider some acts unethical. In Europe two millennia ago human sacrifice was seen as righteous act.
 
Of course, ethics is based on external sources such as laws and codes of conducts. It is, by definition, relative to the society that generates the sources.

My dog for example "steals" what falls from the table. After a short time when I started to think about I found out that "to steal" exists not for dogs in this context. In the real life of wolves=dogs food runs away. So a dog is not only "egoistic" by doing so - a dog is also "altruistic" by doing so, because the food is in this case also not lost for the pack. To eat it is good for the single dog - but also good for the whole pack.

So what you say about "relativity" and "society" is perhaps a totally wrong way to speak about the essentials of ethics. Perhaps exists somewhere in the background a kind of absolute "lightspeed of ethics" which shows the same character independent from different "speedpoints".
 
Druids did practice human sacrifice.

Which druids or other shamans, where, when in Europe? Do you speak about the execution of enemies and/or of criminals? Local exception or universal rule? What is the difference to the people of the USA of today? Concrete facts please and not only verbal statements. We know nearly nothing about the druids of the Celts as far as I heard (although they had been our own ancestors) - but it exists an unbelievable amount of fantasy stories around the theme "druids".
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top