Orwell wrote:
vibratetogether wrote:
I was referring to your statement in the context of this issue, not to the value of considering various moral theories in the philosophical realm.
Well, if deontological moral theories are valid, they are valid in all circumstances.
Quote:
When dealing with the issue of abortion, if you are bringing to the table "this is right, this is wrong", I don't really know where we can go with that, because it's utterly absurd.
Perhaps it seems absurd to you, but deontoloical views typically seem absurd to those who do not share them.
I never conceded that they were valid. Looking at my quote, I don't see how you could conclude that. There is certainly a place for this viewpoint, and you are of course, welcome to hold this opinion and opine on it. However, when it comes to the real world, it is my view (and also imo the view of any rational person) that morality is relative. That is not to say that we should not hold opinions (even very strong opinions), or that we should not fight for our own version of morality, I think that's only natural. My problem is that this absolutist view does not account for my views, while my view would account for the absolutists.
It is not the "duty" aspect that I find absurd, in fact I would argue for some link between our sense of "duty" and our base nature, so it's not absurd so much as a false conclusion based on some hint of truth. It is the idea that there is some structured absolute "right" or "wrong" that I find absurd.
I really wish I could express myself better in words, because I feel as though, if I were able to put into words the connections in my head, most people would instantly be like "oh, I get that." Of course, most people are so hard-wired into their own views that I would probably just go insane with the futility of it all (I find that when confronted with uncomfortable truths, people get defensive, and that turns into outright nastiness).