I guess we had to know the subject of science for the Absolute in order that moral absolutism had to be validated. It's not that this is better, but how do just people believe with common sense what they don't know for an understanding? Take as an example the subject of science of the micro-ecology of life in the park of an urban development. How does the city make money and get away with it? Relatively speaking people are moral and it is that the ethical humans live along-side the fauna and flora. How do business's make money instead at tidy snack stands with tidy areas. The business's wold need their subjective knowledge of the biological reality. The park as a whole would not. That by itself is an absolutist contention. The relativism in morals of ordinary people is substantially needing to be at ignorance; the knowable morals of the absolute exist in serenity over something that allows for that. Anybody read positivism; what is it about in this question of the human nature of people living in various intelligences of absolutely comparable knowledge (from books if needs be) and at the same time knowing in the tolerance and survival mechanism of relativistic morality? Take it if the particular person acts morally it isn't a matter of vain looks and habits. He really is a part of the moral and sensible system committing crimes, insulting his fellowman, treating the environment with disrespect. It just is the moral system which goes on surviving for the sober existence of the community; i. e. relativist morals of a social content within a society of peoples' conscience. What I am self-conscious about for my part in the Conscience for the moral Community "at large" is my business ; I may be a moody "conscience" type; I may not be.
I guess that the morally relative for the absolutely existent community was SUBJECTIVE. That is a problem for developing a Goal for the Absolutely needing community. :dizzy2:
Well I don't have to worry about that; ha, ha, ha. I (we) wrote about the Nothing persistently over the devil.
No. Persistent is the undecided for morality as to subjective vs. objective. And, of course, do subjective people have goals that stick persistently?