@gm2407

1 year ago

I would counter the question of 'Are there objective morals?' with an enquiry as to what morals are and why do we have them. If you can find the purpose and nature of morals then such purpose becomes the object for which we must judge. What are Morals? (the differentiation between customs behaviours and laws) Why do we have Morals? When is morality to be considered, imparted and applied? Where are morals required? How do we decide on what is to be moral or amoral? What are the boundries that define morality and concepts within morality? Theory, to answer such questions we look back into the formation of social groups and how they work. The interplay between social pressure (informal mob), appeal to authority through law (temporal institution) or appeal to authority to religion (spiritual institution) is applied. Differentiating morals from customs, laws, group preferences, individual preferences, religious traditions, supersticious traditions ect will be a considerable task as there are cross overs. These may or may not cross over due to the concepts being universal whether they are objective or subjective. We would also ask ourselves whether a universally found moral standard would be considered objective or customary? What would the consequences be if we found an objective morality and could prove it? What would the consequences be if we could not find an objective morality and could prove that all existing morality have been proven subjective? Does a morality need to be objective for us to find morality to be a useful concept? Is morality only a social component and therefore an aspect of risk and reward within game theory where we should be searching for a way to reach Nash equilibrium?

3 |