Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Existentialism = Relativism?

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2016 3:16:41 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
How does Existentialism differ from Relativism?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2016 3:22:15 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/13/2016 3:16:41 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
How does Existentialism differ from Relativism?

According to Google.

Relativism the doctrine that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute.

Existentialism is a philosophical theory or approach that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2016 3:38:49 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/13/2016 3:22:15 AM, roun12 wrote:
At 6/13/2016 3:16:41 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
How does Existentialism differ from Relativism?

According to Google.

Relativism the doctrine that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute.

Existentialism is a philosophical theory or approach that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will.

Great! Now tell me something I don't know. ;-)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Syko
Posts: 393
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2016 6:45:36 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Existentialism = human experiences + importance of how humans perceive the world
Relativism = There isn't one objective method of the interpretation of reality.

They aren't the same.
For Mother Russia.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 4:56:39 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/13/2016 6:45:36 AM, Syko wrote:
Existentialism = human experiences + importance of how humans perceive the world
Relativism = There isn't one objective method of the interpretation of reality.

They aren't the same.

Okay, so it is possible to be an existentialist and still accept an objectively determined morality.

Btw, I started this post for information not to inappropriately conflate philisophical views.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
keithprosser
Posts: 1,948
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 6:36:38 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
On DOO, relativism usually refers to 'normative moral relativism', the view that all moral views are essentially arbitrary choices made by a society (or individual), so there is no such thing as 'right or wrong' - there are only opinions, or a consensus. On that view the Nazi's quite reasonable views on genocide are of equal validity to that of, for example, people who aren't genocidal mass-murdering thugs.

Existentialism seems to have something in common with relativism because existentialism emphases the importance of the individual being true to their 'authentic' nature or personality, seemingly implying that morality is a matter of personal choice.

But existentialists do not say that someone who is by nature a genocidal maniac is a good person for following his natural instinct to kill lots of people. Rather they would say that such a person has chosen to be evil. AFAIK existentialists don't analyse good and evil - it is taken as given, a condition of an absurd world the individual finds himself born into and now has to find meaning in.
Syko
Posts: 393
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 9:51:53 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 4:56:39 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/13/2016 6:45:36 AM, Syko wrote:
Existentialism = human experiences + importance of how humans perceive the world
Relativism = There isn't one objective method of the interpretation of reality.

They aren't the same.

Okay, so it is possible to be an existentialist and still accept an objectively determined morality.

Btw, I started this post for information not to inappropriately conflate philisophical views.

It's definitely not possible to call yourself an existentialist while believing in objective moral axioms. That's on the level of incompatibility of an atheist believing in gods.

By definition an existentialist denies necessary meaning, while a moral objectivist asserts necessary meaning.
For Mother Russia.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 6:22:33 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 9:51:53 AM, Syko wrote:
At 6/17/2016 4:56:39 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 6/13/2016 6:45:36 AM, Syko wrote:
Existentialism = human experiences + importance of how humans perceive the world
Relativism = There isn't one objective method of the interpretation of reality.

They aren't the same.

Okay, so it is possible to be an existentialist and still accept an objectively determined morality.

Btw, I started this post for information not to inappropriately conflate philisophical views.

It's definitely not possible to call yourself an existentialist while believing in objective moral axioms. That's on the level of incompatibility of an atheist believing in gods.

By definition an existentialist denies necessary meaning, while a moral objectivist asserts necessary meaning.

First, I didn't say objective moral axioms - I said objectively determined morals. I wasn't intentionally pushing any type of absolute moral code.

Secondly, if existentialism is distinct from relativism (and objective morality), then what other moral view might they have?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
keithprosser
Posts: 1,948
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2016 7:05:12 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
It's definitely not possible to call yourself an existentialist while believing in objective moral axioms. That's on the level of incompatibility of an atheist believing in gods.

I don't think that is the case. The essence of existentialism is that the individual is free to choose and the importance that one's choices are authentic. The problem that existentialism seems to 'green light' evil choices was dealt with by Satre et al by ignoring it as much as possible! However, reading Satre or Camus it is obvious that they considered (eg) 'Freedom' to be better than its opposite and 'Happiness' better than its opposite without laying such things down as formal axioms. Existentialists preferred to express their ideas in novels and plays, not mathematical theorems.

An existentialist is not limited to believing only what is a logical consequence of a given dictionary definition of existentialism and rejecting everything else. That isn't philosophy - that is the absurd dogmatism of religious fundamentalism.

I think there are lot of good things in existentialism - I like its emphasis on the individual and the personal struggle to find meaning in an impersonal world. But you can't get your fundamental values or ethics from existentialism - that I don't reject existentitialism or even the label 'existentialist'. It is only recognising that one needs more than just a hammer in one's philosophical tool box - unless you are Neitzsche of course!
Syko
Posts: 393
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 2:06:21 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 6:22:33 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
First, I didn't say objective moral axioms - I said objectively determined morals. I wasn't intentionally pushing any type of absolute moral code.

Secondly, if existentialism is distinct from relativism (and objective morality), then what other moral view might they have?

Moral axioms are the same thing, universally applicable morality. An absolute moral code would logically follow as well from objectively determined morals.

Moral views held by existentialists generally include:
>Humanism
>Moral nihilism
>Consequentialism
>Hedonism
>Virtue ethics
etc
For Mother Russia.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 2:11:25 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:06:21 AM, Syko wrote:
At 6/18/2016 6:22:33 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
First, I didn't say objective moral axioms - I said objectively determined morals. I wasn't intentionally pushing any type of absolute moral code.

Secondly, if existentialism is distinct from relativism (and objective morality), then what other moral view might they have?

Moral axioms are the same thing, universally applicable morality. An absolute moral code would logically follow as well from objectively determined morals.

Moral views held by existentialists generally include:
>Humanism
>Moral nihilism
>Consequentialism
>Hedonism
>Virtue ethics
etc

Okay, thanks for the info.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten