Moral Relativism vs. Natural Law and how does AI interfere

I try it each time and keep failing, not possible to rest when everyone else does not. But the rest is crucial for reconnecting with one´s Source.

Moral relativism is the idea that there are no absolute rules to determine whether something is right or wrong. Unlike moral absolutists, moral relativists argue that good and bad are relative concepts – whether something is considered right or wrong can change depending on opinion, social context, culture or a number of other factors.

Moral relativists argue that there is more than one valid system of mora
lity. A quick glance around the world or through history will reveal that no matter what we happen to believe is morally right and wrong, there is at least one person or culture that believes differently, and holds their belief with as much conviction as we do.

This existence of widespread moral diversity throughout history, between cultures and even within cultures, has led some philosophers to argue that morality is not absolute, but rather that there might be many valid moral systems: that morality is relative.

[link to ethics.org.au (secure)]

OR:

Natural law theory holds that all human conduct is governed by an inherited set of universal moral rules. These rules apply to everyone, everywhere, in the same way.
As a philosophy, natural law deals with moral questions of “right vs. wrong,” and assumes that all people want to live “good and innocent” lives.
Natural law is the opposite of “man-made” or “positive” law enacted by courts or governments.
Under natural law, taking another life is forbidden, no matter the circumstances involved, including self-defense.
Natural law exists independently of regular or “positive” laws—laws enacted by courts or governments. Historically, the philosophy of natural law has dealt with the timeless question of “right vs. wrong” in determining the proper human behavior. First referred to in the Bible, the concept of natural law was later addressed by the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle and Roman philosopher Cicero.

What Is Natural Law?
Natural law is a philosophy based on the idea that everyone in a given society shares the same idea of what constitutes “right” and “wrong.” Further, natural law assumes that all people want to live “good and innocent” lives. Thus, natural law can also be thought of as the basis of “morality.”

Natural law is the opposite of “man-made” or “positive” law. While positive law may be inspired by natural law, natural law may not be inspired by positive law. For example, laws against impaired driving are positive laws inspired by natural laws.

Unlike laws enacted by governments to address specific needs or behaviors, natural law is universal, applying to everyone, everywhere, in the same way. For example, natural law assumes that everyone believes killing another person is wrong and that punishment for killing another person is right.

[link to www.thoughtco.com (secure)]

You are not trying very hard.
I find the rest I need simply by getting the fuck away from people for awhile

Thats one way but it makes you lonely. Not what the seventh day is meant to be ... its about fínding back to each other and to our Lifegiver.

Oh, I see. On the seventh day HE rested.

"God".

NOPE

Moral relativism is the idea that there are no absolute rules to determine whether something is right or wrong. Unlike moral absolutists, moral relativists argue that good and bad are relative concepts – whether something is considered right or wrong can change depending on opinion, social context, culture or a number of other factors.

Moral relativists argue that there is more than one valid system of mora
lity. A quick glance around the world or through history will reveal that no matter what we happen to believe is morally right and wrong, there is at least one person or culture that believes differently, and holds their belief with as much conviction as we do.

This existence of widespread moral diversity throughout history, between cultures and even within cultures, has led some philosophers to argue that morality is not absolute, but rather that there might be many valid moral systems: that morality is relative.

[link to ethics.org.au (secure)]

OR:

Natural law theory holds that all human conduct is governed by an inherited set of universal moral rules. These rules apply to everyone, everywhere, in the same way.
As a philosophy, natural law deals with moral questions of “right vs. wrong,” and assumes that all people want to live “good and innocent” lives.
Natural law is the opposite of “man-made” or “positive” law enacted by courts or governments.
Under natural law, taking another life is forbidden, no matter the circumstances involved, including self-defense.
Natural law exists independently of regular or “positive” laws—laws enacted by courts or governments. Historically, the philosophy of natural law has dealt with the timeless question of “right vs. wrong” in determining the proper human behavior. First referred to in the Bible, the concept of natural law was later addressed by the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle and Roman philosopher Cicero.

What Is Natural Law?
Natural law is a philosophy based on the idea that everyone in a given society shares the same idea of what constitutes “right” and “wrong.” Further, natural law assumes that all people want to live “good and innocent” lives. Thus, natural law can also be thought of as the basis of “morality.”

Natural law is the opposite of “man-made” or “positive” law. While positive law may be inspired by natural law, natural law may not be inspired by positive law. For example, laws against impaired driving are positive laws inspired by natural laws.

Unlike laws enacted by governments to address specific needs or behaviors, natural law is universal, applying to everyone, everywhere, in the same way. For example, natural law assumes that everyone believes killing another person is wrong and that punishment for killing another person is right.

[link to www.thoughtco.com (secure)]

I think it's clear which way you sway, since you completely misrepresented the meaning of Natural Law. You need to watch the movie by Mark Passio called the science of Natural Law.

For example;
"Natural law is a philosophy based on the idea that everyone in a given society shares the same idea of what constitutes “right” and “wrong.”"
Wrong. Natural Law exists and is in effect regardless of what anyone thinks or believes. No shared idea in a given society is needed.

"Further, natural law assumes that all people want to live “good and innocent” lives. Thus, natural law can also be thought of as the basis of “morality.” "
Also wrong, Natural Law does not care about you, it does not assume anything about how people want to live their lives. It just is, and you can choose to base your live and behaviour on it and live a "good" live, or not.


"Natural law is the opposite of “man-made” or “positive” law. While positive law may be inspired by natural law, natural law may not be inspired by positive law."
Also wrong, look into the principle of polarity. Two poles are two sides of the same coin, like the positive and the negative form a circuit making them one. Natural Law just is, it is not made up. Lies are not the opposite of truth, just like darkness is not the opposite of light. Darkness is the lack of light, thats why you can light up a dark room with just one small source of light, but you can not remove the light from a well lit room with a source of darkness. There is not source to darkness, because it is a lack.

"For example, natural law assumes that everyone believes killing another person is wrong and that punishment for killing another person is right."
Very wrong, ever heard of the non-aggresion principle together with the self defense principle? Nobody has the right to initiate violence against another, everybody has the right to defend themselves against violence.

I've watched Mark Passio for years. Thank you.

If that's true, how come you misrepresent Natural Law like that? You should know better.

If that's true, how come you misrepresent Natural Law like that? You should know better.

It's a very deep Thinking, I have many ways about what I Think God Is. Soo, don't judge me, In my opinión, God or Our Development can be concieve has Natural, Relativism or Evolución.

Just one example of Evolution, our small lizards, develope a gene based on living in the city vs Forest, we has Humans in the last 2,000 years No new evolution but a Lizard did it in less than 200 years.

Please. If you have something to contribute then do. If you're here to demean and dismiss..... have at least have a good reason to demonstrate.

I Picked a random google site .. my intention was to have discussion. So, have discussion! I never said I wrote the book on either concept.

So, enlighten all of us!

As an aside, there are things that Mark Passio says that I don't agree with. If he is your guru, cool for you!