Discussion by: utopiaI’ve seen many arguments now where people are disagreeing about the nature or morality and right vs. wrong. Some say morality is:
- subjective (depends on the person, purely a cultural thing, based on preference, etc.)
- objective (there is a measurably correct way and an incorrect way to behave in situations, right and wrong exist outside of just choice, etc.)
Dawkins himself has said on several occasions that science cannot study morality (in particular I remember it from his talk on Al Jazeera), and this is in direct opposition, for example, to the views and work of philosopher/neuroscientist Sam Harris (who is my hero, so be a little understanding of any bias I show).
What do the majority of people here think?
Can we tell others how to behave and what to value and be correct or incorrect in what we tell them?
Or is it all a matter of personal preference and we have no better basis for understanding morality than they do, morality is only what works best for the individual?