When you do something to some one else that you would not want done to yourself.
That is evil.
When you take far more than your fair share.
That is evil
Define good and evil without relativism
Isaiah Cruz
Andrew Jones
Everything you said is irrelevant on a universal scale. Everything you can possibly imagine is irrelevant on a universal scale.
Brody Nelson
I just gave you an arguement and your response is some arbitrary unnamed scientist can refute it? What kind of dumbass appeal to authority is that?
Alexander Sanchez
>by the Catholic church
The church is not the authority of God or Christ.
They lost that claim the moment they crucified Peter.
James King
You totally bypassed the argument. God is unmoved mover to terminate the infinite regress. the need for a first cause follows from the fact that in such a series all causes other than the first are purely instrumental, having no causal power of their own.
Michael Wright
Here I fixed it for you
Isaac Reyes
the Catholic Church is the Israel of God that Christ founded on Saint Peter.
>they crucified peter
last time I checked that was Pontius Pilate brainlet
Mason Lee
So you're saying that it's more likely that an effect that has no orign exists than an answer that has not been though of.
Dominic Cooper
The universe is cold aind indifferent to humanities struggles.
I just want hedonism
Jaxon Bailey
Your question is stupid.. Its hard to tell you why in a short reply, I can expand on this on my discord if you join.
Anyway, relativism is not 'wrong'. Relativism 'of what' is something like the start of a discerning intellect.
Try the spirits. There are many possible contexts/relatvisms. There is no 'objective' paradigm to prefer one over the other, each have an internal economy of purpose and internal consistency, or they don't, and each is compatible with persuasion or compromise, and humility, or it doesn't. Each may support communication and exchange, or refinement, or any constructed value, or it may only profess these things and be nihilistic-ly-solipsistic.
The search for objection criteria is folly and meaningless and search for a false worldly authority/orthodoxy. The best analogy of 'good', according to truth (in my opinion), is quickening, but that is relative to my schema, it doesn't belong to 'objective measures'.
My discord is philosophy by psyche, same name of youtube.