Do moral facts exist or is it all relative

Only your perception of truth is fact then? or only the 'general census' of 'truthful' perception is fact? Either way, at one point everything you know to be true will be false in 100 years, 100,000 years, etc.

Also, lol @ your opening statement.

You're creating a slippery slope by assuming that the truths which we define as absolute now will be disproved.
In that sense, any reality is deemed meaningless because a superior one will be lived in the future.

Yes, the general consensus of perception is deemed fact because perception is the only mechanism by which we may judge truth from fiction.
And an agreement of perceptions is how we can transform an individual experience into one that is shared and is deemed truth.

The best part about this? In my mind, I'm correct and in your mind you're correct.

..Sound familiar?

So if I were arguing with a child, wouldn't I have the best chance of being right?

In your mind, not theirs. Depending upon the subject they may have 10 years before they can even fathom understanding that what you're saying is true. In their reality they are absolutely correct as are you in yours.

Debating about this is pointless, in my mind.

It's pointless because you're redefining truth as individual rather than consensual. But in a world with 7 billion people, that means nothing.

Last comment for me...


LOOK UP THE DEFINITION OF RELATIVITY.

It's pointless because you're redefining truth as individual rather than consensual. But in a world with 7 billion people, that means nothing.

I have to agree with this.
1/7,000,000,000 is a big fight.
Most people around the world agree that murder is wrong.
"That's because religion said so", well, if everyone didn't already think it was wrong, they would spit in that guys' face, and these religions would have never started. People became religious because they agreed with certain ideas, such as not being murdered.
My point?
If you take all 7 billion people and survey them, believe it or not, we'd get similar results. Is it moral? It might not be. It might be based on success. "Do not steal-- from me" "Do not kill-- me", these aren't morals, these are security measures. We only have progress and safety because we have been given morals.

A world out there exists where killing and stealing is considered perfectly fine, and I'm sure that world is still having witch trials, and has under 1 billion.

But I'm also very tired, and just rambling an opinion.

Also, the 2+2=4 thing makes sense, if morals do, in fact, exist.

In your mind, not theirs. Depending upon the subject they may have 10 years before they can even fathom understanding that what you're saying is true. In their reality they are absolutely correct as are you in yours. Debating about this is pointless, in my mind.

So pointless you wasted your time debating it.

You don't believe 2+2=4 is an absolute truth?

You don't believe 2+2=4 is an absolute truth?

2+2 = a pair of 2's, depending on how bad his OCD is. Saw that on Dr. Phil today, and it is so wack. Chick couldn't do anything unless it was in 4s.