The Radical Left

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 11 – Ethics 1 (Relativism) – Part 5: Is there a right way to have sex?

by

Ethics isn’t a static list of rules; it’s a living conversation that grows with us. Just like intimacy norms evolve with culture and understanding, so do all ethical systems. What’s acceptable in one era can be considered scandalous in another, and that’s not moral chaos—it’s the sign of ethics responding to human experience. Whether it’s relationships, societal roles, or the acceptance of LGBTQ+ norms, ethics evolves to reflect our growing understanding of fairness, respect, and consent. The rules aren’t handed down from on high—they’re crafted, challenged, and reshaped by the people living them.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 11 – Ethics 1 (Relativism) – Part 4: Have you ever been to Rome?

by

Ethics can be like a local dialect, shaped by culture and history. What’s virtuous in one culture may not be the same in another. Cultural relativism suggests that morality is not universal, but instead grows from the values and needs of the society that nurtures it. It’s not moral anarchy, but an understanding that ethics are contextual—what’s right in one place might be seen differently elsewhere. The most ethical thing we can do in different cultural settings is learn, adapt, and respect the local customs, understanding that ethical rules wear different outfits depending on where you are.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 11 – Ethics 1 (Relativism) – Part 3: Does this dress make me look fat?

by

Ethical relativism challenges the idea that moral rules are universal. Like the trick question, “Does this dress make me look fat?”, the answer often depends on context. The “right” answer isn’t always universal, but is instead shaped by culture, personal connections, and situational factors. This doesn’t mean that there are no moral absolutes, but it recognizes that ethical decisions are sometimes fluid, and the most ethical choice may involve understanding the person asking and the context of the question.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 11 – Ethics 1 (Relativism) – Part 2: Who makes the rules?

by

The question of who makes the rules in a world without God is a fundamental one for ethical relativism. Without a divine lawgiver, morality must come from us – from our communities, our relationships, and our shared needs. Divine Command Theory, which insists that something is good because God commands it, falters because it leaves morality arbitrary and open to manipulation. If there’s no God making the rules, we are left to create them – not because they are divine, but because they help us coexist. Our rules arise out of necessity, and while ethical relativism might be unsettling, it also means we bear responsibility for the choices we make.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 11 – Ethics 1 (Relativism) – Part 1: Introduction – Why be good?

by

Why be good? Before diving into rules and commandments, we need to ask: Why bother? Morality isn’t just about rules—it’s about how to live well. Socrates asked not, “What rules should we follow?” but “What kind of life is worth living?” Ethics, for the ancients, wasn’t about being perfect—it was about flourishing, about becoming the kind of person who functions well in the world. Living ethically isn’t about cosmic points—it’s about the kind of person you become when you repeatedly choose kindness, integrity, fairness, and care. The real reason to care about ethics isn’t abstract; it’s because we matter. The way we treat others shapes the world we wake up in, and the way we live shapes who we become.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 10 – God 2 (Atheism) – Part 7: Summary – Heads or tails?

by

After everything we’ve explored, there’s no clear answer. No airtight proof for or against God. Reasonable people, standing on opposite sides of the same question, each convinced they’re being honest. At the core, we’re not theists or atheists as much as we are agnostics with preferences. Faith doesn’t need certainty—doubt is its companion. The opposite of faith is not doubt, but knowledge—the kind that closes the conversation. Instead, we engage in abduction reasoning, trying to make sense of incomplete evidence. Some see God in the universe. Others don’t. Different stories, same data. The question of God might not be about solving a math problem but about how we reason, what we fear, what we hope, and the uncertainty we can live with.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 10 – God 2 (Atheism) – Part 6: What has God done for you lately?

by

We keep looking for proof of God, hoping for a sign, a miracle. But miracles always come with alternative explanations—remission, coincidence, intervention, or just plain luck. What we call a miracle often depends more on what we already believe than on what actually happened. If God is acting in the world, why are the miracles so selective, so personal, and so ambiguous? A God who could make things clear, but doesn’t, begins to look indistinguishable from one who isn’t there at all. Atheism, for some, doesn’t come from hostility, but from exhaustion—from waiting, hoping, and hearing nothing back. Why is evidence so hard to find? And if God doesn’t exist, why are humans so good at finding meaning anyway?

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 10 – God 2 (Atheism) – Part 5: Do you believe in Santa Claus?

by

Freud suggested that religion, much like the story of Santa Claus, isn’t necessarily a harmful lie, but an illusion born of need. It provides structure to chaos, comfort in the face of an unpredictable world, and offers a cosmic parent figure to protect us. Religion, then, is a psychological shelter—something that helps us cope with our existential fears. As societies evolve, the gods evolve with them—goddesses became gods, and the authority of the divine mirrored shifts in social power. Freud’s sharp insight: belief in God isn’t always about truth—it’s about reassurance. But if God were invented, not discovered, what does that say about the universe, and about ourselves?

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 10 – God 2 (Atheism) – Part 4: Have you stopped beating your wife?

by

The free will defense, often cited by believers to explain the problem of evil, sounds comforting at first: evil exists because God gave us the freedom to choose. But this reasoning quickly unravels when we consider that free will is selectively interrupted by miracles, prayers, and divine intervention. Why, then, does God intervene sometimes and not others? Additionally, much suffering is not a result of human choice—natural disasters, diseases, birth defects—so the free will defense cannot explain natural evil. And in heaven, a place of perfection, free will seems unnecessary for goodness. The defense falters when we confront the reality of suffering and the fact that, often, telling the grieving that pain is “necessary” for a greater good feels dismissive, not loving. Maybe, the honest response to suffering is not explanation, but humility and presence.

Read the letter →

An Introduction to Philosophy (RLL style) Week 10 – God 2 (Atheism) – Part 3: Have you ever been in pain?

by

Pain doesn’t ask permission. It doesn’t care about belief. It just is. The traditional view of God—powerful, all-knowing, and good—collides with the reality of suffering, leading us to ask: If God could intervene, why does so much pain remain untouched? The problem of evil isn’t a theological trick; it’s a question born from love. It’s the refusal to accept suffering as just the way things are. Sometimes, atheism begins with grief, with the painful recognition that a loving God who doesn’t intervene looks eerily like one who isn’t there at all. So, what do we do with a universe where pain is real, often undeserved, and the most compassionate response isn’t explanation—but presence?

Read the letter →