Episode
Curse Moral Relativism!
- Podcast
- Practical Stoicism
- Published
- Feb 19, 2026
- Duration seconds
- 1173
- Processing state
not_requested- Canonical source
- https://stoicism.captivate.fm/episode/curse-moral-relativism
Actions
POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/practical-stoicism-4733608/episodes/curse-moral-relativism/transcription-requests
Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/practical-stoicism-4733608/curse-moral-relativism.md
Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.
Summary
Subscribe to the FREE Stoic Brekkie newsletter: https://stoicbrekkie.com I am a public philosopher. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, and keep it independent and online, at https://stoicismpod.com/members In this episode, I respond to a short clip discussing incest as an example of emotivism in meta-ethics. Emotivism claims that when we say something is wrong, we are not stating a fact but expressing disapproval. The suggestion in the clip is that incest may ultimately be “wrong” only because we feel that it is wrong. I take that seriously. It is true that many people struggle to articulate why incest is objectively wrong beyond saying it feels disgusting. And philosophers should care about that. If something is wrong, we should be able to explain why in rational terms. Using Stoic role ethics, I outline a clear argument. In Stoicism, some roles are grounded in nature. These roles are not arbitrary. They come with built-in functions and ends. The sibling role is ordered toward familial care, trust, and cooperative development within the household. It is explicitly non-erotic because its function is to stabilize kinship bonds. The lover role, by contrast, is ordered toward erotic partnership and exclusivity. When a person attempts to merge these roles, they introduce incompatible aims into a single relationship. Stoic role ethics holds that voluntarily chosen roles must not contradict natural ones. If they do, one role must be abandoned. Because the sibling role is grounded in nature, it cannot be abandoned without corrupting its function. Adopting the lover role toward a sibling therefore represents a rational error. It makes both roles impossible to fulfil properly. This means the wr…