Night Ripper;159065 wrote:
They are both propositions that involve things which don't exist, a King of France and wrongness outside of all culture.
So wrongness both exists and does not exist, then, because it exists inside culture but does not exist outside culture? The KOF doesn't exist anywhere; the KOF simply does not exist. Moreover, moral "wrongness" and "rightness" are non-physical properties of actions or events, they are not things. So they do not typically function as subjects of sentences or entities designated in a proposition. They could, in principle, but then you would be talking about properties, not about propositions, actions, or events. Moral relativism is a thesis about the truth-status of of normative jugments with respect to culture.
Please formulate what you are saying into a truth-valuable proposition, otherwise it is useless discussing this. Like I said, I want to see an instance
of it. If you can't give one, then you are talking nonsense.
I can give you a instance of a truth-valuable propositions about the non-existent King of France that is true. But you can't give me an instance of your claim that "all moral truths are relative." It is clear you can't give one because it is absurd.