Morals

[SliK]

A child doesn't have the mental capacity to understand what is right and what is wrong.

But he understands that he must breathe, eat, sleep and drink.. Because these are all universal, instinctual behaviors. "Not murdering someone" most certainly is not.

[classthe_king]

So? Murdering is still wrong.

[CrashBand]

I think you can argue something is universally wrong if it is bringing down the aggregate well-being of living creatures.

Therefore needlessly and arbitrarily murdering someone is universally wrong.

[SliK]

Well, I guess I disagree.

[CrashBand]

Would you agree that a universe where every living creature is in the worst possible suffering is bad?

[Willy]

Morality stems from empathy. That's why killing someone or kicking a puppy in the face evokes a strong response.

Humans are usually built with empathy hardwired into the brain. It has allowed us to evolve as social animals.

This explains how cultures from different parts of the world have similar laws. I think it would be difficult for a culture to not value life, as it is against our nature.

[SliK]

Morality stems from empathy. That's why killing someone or kicking a puppy in the face evokes a strong response.

Humans are usually built with empathy hardwired into the brain. It has allowed us to evolve as social animals.

This explains how cultures from different parts of the world have similar laws. I think it would be difficult for a culture to not value life, as it is against our nature.

Yeah, humans have empathy. So actions evoke an emotional response and we either 'like' or 'dislike' actions. The action its self is neither right nor wrong. Right and wrong are completely subjective lmao, how can you say an arbitrary action is intrinsically wrong?

[Table]

Committing homicide for no apparent reason is morally wrong in almost every known society, I believe. Sacrifices, capital punishments etc don't count, neither does the ideology of an individual. (strictly talking about what all societies deem as immoral.) Again, like the OP said, no action is right or wrong. It's just that certain morals are necessary for the persistence of a species.

[SliK]

Would you agree that a universe where every living creature is in the worst possible suffering is bad?

Good and bad are different to right and wrong.
I would say it's bad from the perspective of someone who can empathize with living creatures.
If that parallel universe does exist, along with an infinite amount of others, I wouldn't (and couldn't) say it is wrong. It just is.

[CrashBand]

Would you agree that a universe where every living creature is in the worst possible suffering is bad?

Good and bad are different to right and wrong.
I would say it's bad from the perspective of someone who can empathize with living creatures.
If that parallel universe does exist, along with an infinite amount of others, I wouldn't (and couldn't) say it is wrong. It just is.

So I think we can agree that this place would be bad, in every sense of the word.

So then you must concede that any action to move out of this state is good.

And in my view, is right.

But yes, we still have the "is-ought" problem. i.e. why should we not do bad things.

[classthe_king]

Just because some people don't see murder as wrong doesn't mean that murder is not wrong, it means their view on murder is wrong. You use the middle ages as why it isn't universal but they didn't believe that the earth revolved around the sun. Does that mean that the earth revolving around the sun isn't a universal truth? No, it just means that their society got it wrong. Babies don't even know what the sun is, let alone that we revolve around it. That doesn't mean it's not still true that. Murder is the same thing.

[Willy]

Morality stems from empathy. That's why killing someone or kicking a puppy in the face evokes a strong response.

Humans are usually built with empathy hardwired into the brain. It has allowed us to evolve as social animals.

This explains how cultures from different parts of the world have similar laws. I think it would be difficult for a culture to not value life, as it is against our nature.

Yeah, humans have empathy. So actions evoke an emotional response and we either 'like' or 'dislike' actions. The action its self is neither right nor wrong. Right and wrong are completely subjective lmao, how can you say an arbitrary action is intrinsically wrong?

I'm not saying any one action is intrinsically right or wrong. I'm explaining how most people, and consequently most societies have similar moral outlooks. It's not just a coincidence... humans are hardwired with empathy, and empathy is the foundation for morality. No action is intrinsically right or wrong, but people view shit through a moral lens. Our moral lens is built with empathy-glass, and that's why regardless of eyesight most people end up seeing the same shit.

[CrashBand]

Just because some people don't see murder as wrong doesn't mean that murder is not wrong, it means their view on murder is wrong. You use the middle ages as why it isn't universal but they didn't believe that the earth revolved around the sun. Does that mean that the earth revolving around the sun isn't a universal truth? No, it just means that their society got it wrong. Babies don't even know what the sun is, let alone that we revolve around it. That doesn't mean it's not still true that. Murder is the same thing.

Yeah but we still need to prove that there are universal truths/morals.

[Willy]

Another problem with saying morality is completely relative is moral progression becomes basically impossible. A society would never feel the need to change, because their views on right and wrong are relative.

[CrashBand]

Another problem with saying morality is completely relative is moral progression becomes basically impossible. A society would never feel the need to change, because their views on right and wrong are relative.

Moral relativism has several little intrinsic problems, including the one you mentioned.