Obviously, there are moral standards by which human sacrifice is ok. The problem arises when someone tries to construe humanist moral standards (antiracism etc.) to justify human sacrifice as acceptable "in the right context". There exist different, incompatible moral standards.
This is not nihilism. Nihilists don't try to resolve interpretations of history by imposing a "conversation" on an imaginary audience of morally synchronized peers. That's solid Kegan 3.
-
-
I disagree. Moral relativism is absolutely nihilism. Constructing an apologia for a brutal practice from a different culture on some level requires you to believe that *nothing* is sufficient to form a universal moral standard.
-
The Kegan 3 position is like that of the original conquistadors. They had an overwhelmingly strong culturally endorsed imperative to do what they were doing so they never questioned the ethics of it. Modern cultural anthropology is an attempt to review this at Kegan 4.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.