Absolute Morals and evolution

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Whether or not somebody takes off their shoes before entering his house does not affect the "true happiness" of anyone except an emotional, fickle person. It sounds as if you are defining "good" by that which causes "bliss" to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fred didn't really care about the shoes... but to purposefully disrespect someone... most people care about that, don't they? To treat someone as inferior... most people wouldn't appreciate it, and it would decrease their happiness, and probably hurt any sort of friendship that they had, right?

So, point is... Albert's values made something wrong for him to do, although it was right for Bob to do it. Different cultures have ways of interacting with each other due to a difference in values. This aspect plays a part in morality, I think.

[/ QUOTE ]
The following can be found here:
http://www.rationalchristianity.net/relativism.html

Moral Relativism

Is morality relative? Are definitions of right and wrong a matter of opinion, or are there absolute standards? Some things to consider about moral relativism:

1. Some moral standards are universal to all cultures and times. What society approves of treason/disloyalty, murder of innocents or theft?

2. While people may disagree on whether an action is right or wrong, everyone agrees that people ought to do good. Even someone who believes that morality is relative will say that people ought not impose their morality on others, or that people ought to respect others' beliefs - both of which are clear statements of ethics that the speaker believes others should follow.

3. If morality is a matter of opinion, we have no reason to condemn others' beliefs or actions. But this means we can't condemn philosophies such as Nazism or racism or actions such as child abuse or rape. Nor can relativists condemn those who are intolerant of other beliefs (including their own), because "intolerance is wrong" is merely an opinion of theirs which is not shared by the intolerant. Likewise, if ethics are only opinions, praising heroic or unselfish deeds would make as much sense as praising someone for sharing our taste in food, for praise assumes that one has done something good when one could have easily done otherwise.