Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2015-12-12 04:53 pm
[ SECRET POST #3265 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3265 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10. [nf]
__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
12.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 075 secrets from Secret Submission Post #467.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2- not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
I'm honestly not sure it is possible to be completely morally relative. At least, I've never heard of anyone who is. You would end up with a lot of logical fallacies, and also even the most relativistic person has limits (child rape, murder, things like that) and tends to get offended when things are done to them even if they call them relative when done to others.
no subject
You can accept that something is morally relative and still be angered by having it done to you. That's not a contradictory event; believing that morality is relative means that people will do things to you that perceive as immoral, but you know that the person who did them sees them as morally justifiable.
Moral relativism means you can accept the simultaneous validity of contradicting personal moral philosophies.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2015-12-18 09:11 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2015-12-18 09:03 am (UTC)(link)