this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2025
1378 points (98.8% liked)

Political Memes

9824 readers
2315 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 1 week ago

It tells you that concepts like rights, morality, right and wrong are all human inventions and are all relative.

As much as philosophy, mathematics, logic. Relativistic fallacy: relative is the wrong word. They're unfalsifiable.

Nonetheless, committing yourself to a set of premises commits you to their logical consequences. Consistency demands rejecting contradictions.

You have a certain right, if the society you live in thinks you should have that right and if circumstances allow that you have that right.

Moral relativism. Do you think we should respect a moral system that accepts slavery as much as one that doesn't? If not, then you're not a moral relativist, and that's a relativist fallacy.

That means none of these rights are unalienable or guaranteed

Ideas such as inalienable/universal/inherent rights come from moral philosophy. The premise (if you accept it) is that they exist regardless of whether people choose to respect them: no one can revoke those rights, only violate them. Violations are unjust.

They don't imply a legal system can't violate ethics. They're for arguing a system shouldn't & to demand a more just one. It's still up to us to get that system.

Supposing is implies ought (or the contrapositive in this case) is a naturalistic fallacy.