Quote:
Originally Posted by Harald B
That's good to hear. Nothing is as destructive to moral relativism as consistently rewarding the "good" choice; even moreso since it invites people to make the "good" choice based only on their expectation of a reward. I see a lot of this in games, and it always makes these parts seem very shallow.
To achieve total moral relativism, the consequences of your actions should be independent of their moral standing. In fact, you could argue that realistically immoral acts should be rewarded, since simply picking the acts that are best for you without regard for their morality is typically perceived as highly immoral.
|
Let me digress for a moment to point out that "moral relativism" doesn't mean an "anything goes" approach to morality, a lack of morality, or a profession of amorality. Moral relativism is simply the philosophical position that moral assertions cannot be proved, that there is no objective standard by which one moral code can be shown to be superior to another, and that morality is therefore essentially a matter of opinion. Moral relativists do not necessarily argue that people should not follow the moral codes of their societies, they just see the morality as an aspect of culture, not an expression of universal truth.
