Roger Scruton: The Problem with Moral Relativism
The popular notion that an individual can only be judged if a person shares his or her background, history, desires, or worldview has led most people to regard any outsider judgment as ‘a sort of impertinence’, philosopher Roger Scruton suggests.
This judgement against judgment isn’t morally neutral though, it is morally neutralizing.
If human beings have a moral nature, which our need for judging plainly entails, the effect of neutralizing morality is of course to suppress extreme expressions. If human nature were naturally good, then the effect might be helpful. We would take greater delight in truth, beauty, and goodness.
However, given the fact of human sinfulness, the judgment against judgment has just allowed subjective morality to have a sort of objective standing. And as such, the philosophy of the allegedly non-judgmental libertarian very quickly becomes that of the libertine.
You may be interested
How the Queen – the ‘last Christian monarch’ – has made the Christian faith her message
admin - Dec 24, 2017"For the past 17 years, (the Queen's) messages have taken on a different tone, with the Queen explaining her own…
Stephen LeDrew fired for inadvertently exposing Canada’s freeze on free speech
admin - Dec 16, 2017I reported that Canadian CP 24 Host Stephen LeDrew was suspended for appearing on 'Tucker Carlson' a few weeks ago.…
Cell Phone Radiation a Major Health Risk
admin - Dec 16, 2017"Most state and federal health agencies have not kept up with the research. “The preponderance of the research indicates that cell…