A Look at Morality

Wow, morality. Definitely a thought provoking issue. Morality certainly exists, I think we can certainly agree on that. Which of the categories that your morality falls into I think depends on where you believe morality comes from. The most convincing argument I've heard for the origination of morality is that it is essentially an evolutionary byproduct. Being kind and generous to others can often lead to them being kind and generous to you, which is beneficial to survival. So it follows that a species that does treat it's fellow creatures well is one that is more likely to survive, so natural selection essentially implants that idea of "treating others as you would wish to be treated yourself", which is really what a lot of what we would call morality is centered around. So I think that alone is enough to give a fairly reasonable account of a rather primitive form of morality. That said however, I don't think that gives a full account for the depth of the moral nature of human beings, not by itself.

Human beings (most of us, anyway) are very highly developed animals. So our sense of morality is also quite highly developed. I think what really gives a better account of what we perceive as moral or immoral really comes from our own innate ability to contemplate morality itself. In this sense, there are things that are objectively immoral. Is murder immoral? Yes. Is it objectively moral? I would say yes, simply because we, as human beings, can recognize that there is an objective reason not to do it. Same with things like rape, theft and so on. I think morality can be defined as this: A moral action is an action that helps a fellow creature in some way, and an immoral action is one that hurts or fails to help them. Put under that lens, then I think that gives a fairly plausible explanation of an objective morality without needing to appeal to a deity.

Now, there are a few issues that are normally considered moral issues, that there isn't an obvious objective answer for . A good example might be abortion. The real issue here is at what point does the fetus become a person. The common consensus is that the nervous system develops at around 4-6 months, which I would say is a fairly good standard for being a person. If the abortion takes place before it develops, then it isn't immoral, because no harm is being done to a person. If it is done after, then harm is being done, so it is immoral. So that seems to be a fairly good reconciliation of abortion with an objective moral standard, or so it seems to me, that is if you happen to take abortion is an issue of morality, you may indeed think it has nothing to do with morality at all and just boils down to freedom of choice, up to you, I don't think I could say that there is an intrinsically right answer.

So, in summery, I have sketched what seems to me to be a fairly plausible account of an objective moral standard, without needing to appeal to a deity at any point. If anyone wants to challenge this view then please feel free, I don't think these views are self-evident, I believe they need defended through argumentation, so I would be happy to engage with anyone who disagrees with me.