Skip to content

Relativism, absence of pillars and meaning of life

Sat 12, May 2012

The relativism means that all moral is relative, and by extension; the moral is philosophically meaningless. So, if you are completely relativist; you won’t have any pillar.


Now, this is the question; if you haven’t got any moral that constantly says what you should do; what prevents you from stop living?


The standard non-religious western society based moral just says “life is happiness” and because you WANT happiness, you live.

But the problem is that, without moral; you have to consider if life is the same that happiness.


Life is unhappiness, you haven’t got any reason to live because living is only making you unhappy.
HOWEVER there are two problems with this.

The first problem is that because you can’t be sure if life is or isn’t happiness; is better to stay alive because while you stay alive you can always decide between live or stop living; but when you’re dead, you can’t decide between stay dead or live again; even more, you can’t think.

The second problem is that if you’re relativist, why is happiness your objective?


The first problem is unsolvable by definition; the second is not.

Just think, why we do everything? If your answer is “because it makes us happy” you’re right.

All, everything we do is because WE WANT; no exceptions.

If you help others risking your actual happiness; you do it because doing things according to your moral MAKES YOU HAPPY, even the most altruistic person in Earth is as egoist as any other.

If you do things because other person is pointing you with a gun and orders you to make his homework; you do it because the knowledge of that you will die if you don’t do his homework is giving you so much unhappiness that no homework will be enough boring for prevent you do that.


So, if all your actions depend of the happiness that your brain awards you; your only moral should be try to make your brain give as most happiness during the most time. But if life is unhappiness and death is not happiness nor unhappiness; death may be better than life OR MAYBE YOU SHOULD STAY ALIVE BECAUSE I MAY BE WRONG.


Also, the objective is not “be as happy as possible during to the rest of your life”; what opens the door to drugs, BUT “be as happy as possible during the most time as possible”; what opens the door to a long and happy life.


For third time I’m open to discussion, the fact of if death is eternal unhappiness or eternal some-sort of happiness is completely open and my only argument is that when you die your brain can’t give you a lot of unhappiness because you’re dead nor any sort of happiness because of that.


From → Philosophy

Leave a reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: