Also, Echoing Jadagul: as most people use the words, you’re a moral relativist
Honestly I do not understand how you can continue calling Eliezer a relativist when he has persistently claimed that what is right doesn’t depend on who’s asking and doesn’t depend on what anyone thinks is right.
Is anyone who does not believes in universally compelling arguments a relativist?
Is anyone who does not believe that morality is ontologically primitive a relativist?
Is anyone who does not believe that morality admits a concise description a relativist?
Honestly I do not understand how you can continue calling Eliezer a relativist when he has persistently claimed that what is right doesn’t depend on who’s asking and doesn’t depend on what anyone thinks is right.
Which mean he isn’t an individual-level relativist. He could still be a group level relativist,
@Roko
Honestly I do not understand how you can continue calling Eliezer a relativist when he has persistently claimed that what is right doesn’t depend on who’s asking and doesn’t depend on what anyone thinks is right.
Is anyone who does not believes in universally compelling arguments a relativist?
Is anyone who does not believe that morality is ontologically primitive a relativist?
Is anyone who does not believe that morality admits a concise description a relativist?
To your first two questions, probably and yes.
Which mean he isn’t an individual-level relativist. He could still be a group level relativist,