Problem
This thing which I have called for convenience the Tao, and which others may call Natural Law or Traditional Morality or the First Principles of Practical Reason or the First Platitudes, is not one among a series of possible systems of value. It is the sole source of all value judgments. If it is rejected, all value is rejected. If any value is retained, it is retained. The effort to refute it and raise a new system of value in its place is self-contradictory. There has never been, and never will be, a radically new judgment of value in the history of the world. What purport to be new systems or (as they now call them) "ideologies," all consist of fragments from the Tao itself, arbitrarily wrenched from they context in the whole and then swollen to madness in their isolation, yet still owing to the Tao and to it alone such validity as they possess.
A. Given the cultural and moral relativism common in our culture, what do you think of Lewis' argument that all systems of value, all concepts of right and wrong, ultimately derive from the same source?
B. What experiences have you had with cultural and moral relativism?
C. As you reflect on your past experience(s) with cultural and moral relativism, what conclusions can you draw?
D. After watching the video and thinking about cultural and moral relativism, what have you learned?
E. Describe at least one specific way in which you can apply what you have learned about Natural Law in reference to cultural and moral relativism.