A sociologist from the University of Notre Dame completed a study recently gauging the moral thinking of 18-23 year olds. The results are startling, depressing and for this father of five, they’re scary.
You’re not going to believe it how bad it actually is.
Please continue reading at the National Catholic Register>>>
September 23, 2011 at 2:36 pm
catchy title
September 23, 2011 at 8:00 pm
Well you know what the jewish man said. " Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one". So what and whatever.
Certainly, people mouth off relativistic claptrap. However, if you try punching them in the face and then asking them their opinion concerning the morality of your action I'm sure they would come up with the right answer. Relativism is just an Alice in wonderland concept. When it comes to things that affect us negatively you will find in reality, very few, if any relativists.
September 24, 2011 at 3:34 am
It might be just another shining example of the inept catechesis many of these kids get and the declining practice of their parents who go the same awful catechesis.
September 27, 2011 at 12:56 am
I believe this is misguided. There are no more totalitarian, morally judgmental and oppressive places in our society than the completely secular university campuses. It is not true that moral relativism has replaced Christian morality. Rather, a new morality that is foreign to Christianity has become dominant. Relativism is reserved for aspects of life that this new code believes to be unimportant; much like how Christian morality is essentially relativistic about what color one paints one’s house. For those aspects of life that the new code does deem morally relevant, however, absolutely no dissent will be tolerated. The new moral landscape is scary not because morality doesn’t exist, but because the new morality is totally hostile to Christian morality and it is totally committed to its suppression.
September 28, 2011 at 8:01 am
Arguably, making morality dependent on the political and academic fads of the hour is a form of "moral relativism".
There is a sense in which nothing is relativistic; "relativity" in physics, for instance, actually has an absolute, c, the speed of light in a vacuum—it replaces space and time, the absolutes in Newtonian physics (Google "The Absolute Beneath the Relative" by Stanley Jaki).
In this sense, of course, natural law morality is relative, too—right and wrong, after all, are "relative" to the nature of any given thing. But what distinguishes natural-law morals from what's called "moral relativism" is that, in natural law, right and wrong are still values intrinsic to whatever objects are under discussion, and their natures, rather than dependent on the wishes or needs of some third party.
Basically, if natural-law morals is like relativity, still retaining an absolute to which other things are relative, the dominant theory of morals ("moral relativism") is like the theory of gravity in the famous Sokal hoax, a socially conditioned property.