Philo
Sophos
·com

philosophy is for everyone
and not just philosophers

philosophers should know lots
of things besides philosophy


PhiloSophos knowledge base

Pathways to Philosophy programs

Pathways web sites

Philosophy lovers gallery

Science, arts and humanities

PhiloSophos home

home first back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 forward

Davy asked:

Is it unethical to try change a persons morals?

Are all ethical theories relative, i.e. Kantian, Utilitarian etc. or is there only one true moral theory?

============

If you really object to someone's morals isn't it unethical NOT to try to change them? ... within the
limits, no doubt, of certain civilised constraints, good manners, etc., or whatever is appropriate to the
nature of the particular issues at stake and your relationship with the other person? Conversely, if you
believe, or come to the conclusion, that it is neverethical to try to change anyone else's morals, then
wherein, would you say, does the point of your own morals consist (whatever they may be)?

Rather than just trying to answer these questions at the level of abstract generalities and principles,
can you think of a range of specific cases of your own, think your way through them... and see what
conclusions you come to?

Robert de Villiers

How far should we be prepared to go in trying to 'change' the moral views of someone whose views
differ from our own?

You will probably agree that murder is going too far, but anti-abortionists and animal rights protestors
have in the past resorted to terrorism. At the end of the day, what matters is not that the other person
has the objectionable moral views but rather the fact that they are prepared to acton those views. So
if you can't win the argument, then consistency with your own firmly held moral beliefs demands that
you take the next logical step and resort to violence.

Or?...

Geoffrey Klempner