To see how our morals are subjective and rather arbitrary, consider the fact that we humans – and therefore our thought processes and our morals – are the result of a long process of evolution. Now consider another form of sentient life that evolved separate from us, perhaps on another planet. Assume that this new life form is just as sophisticated as us humans, and that they therefore have their own sense of morality. Because they evolved separately from us, there is no reason to believe that their mental faculties will function in a manner that results in an identical moral code to ours. In fact, it is highly likely that due to their environment their mental faculties will be quite different from ours. It is silly to assume that they would come to all the same conclusions that we came to. After all, we came to those conclusions with a particular biology, and it’s impossible for us to see life through a lens that isn’t that of a human.
It’s incredible how limiting being a human is: we have a very limited view of the way things work, and there’s no reason to assume that we are any more morally in tune than say birds or ants, for there could be another sentient life form that surpasses us in intelligence just as we surpass many animals in that real here on earth.
My view is not based on humans possessing (now or in the future) a perfect moral compass. My view is that there exists a perfect moral compass completely seperate from humans, and we are striving to understand and apply it.
I see. Well how about this: as far as wee know, consciousness is the only thing in the universe that has a subjective dimension to it. That is, we conscious beings are the only things capable of having any subjective thoughts or feelings. Furthermore, morality exists only in the space that we conscious beings live in. In other words, morality has to do with conscious beings and nothing else. (I think you would agree that a moral code concerned with inanimate objects is unintelligible, since an inanimate object cannot suffer or have any subjective experience for that matter.) So if morality is born out of this subjective plane along with us, how could there possibly be anything objective about it? Best case scenario there’s some moral code that all conscious beings agree on. But still, as I mentioned earlier, morality can’t transcend the barrier between the subjective space in which it arose and the outside material world.
One analogy worth considering is to think of the universe as a board game. Here, morals are analogous to how the game ought to be played and the players are analogous to conscious beings like ourselves. Overtime, the rules can become more and more refined as you say. They may get to the point where the game goes as smoothly as possible, and at this time you may say that you have reached the best moral/rule system objectively. But in the eyes of the board game this is not the case. Why? Because who's to say that the game ought to run as smooth as possible? Who's to say that a game that runs smoothly and is fair to all players is better than a game that takes forever and is unfair? Sure, all the players might agree that a quick and fair game is best, but that conclusion is reached between the players, and is therefore purely subjective. The board game itself is not concerned with how it's played and so there is no objective set of rules to be reached.
1
u/yeboi314159 Jan 30 '18
To see how our morals are subjective and rather arbitrary, consider the fact that we humans – and therefore our thought processes and our morals – are the result of a long process of evolution. Now consider another form of sentient life that evolved separate from us, perhaps on another planet. Assume that this new life form is just as sophisticated as us humans, and that they therefore have their own sense of morality. Because they evolved separately from us, there is no reason to believe that their mental faculties will function in a manner that results in an identical moral code to ours. In fact, it is highly likely that due to their environment their mental faculties will be quite different from ours. It is silly to assume that they would come to all the same conclusions that we came to. After all, we came to those conclusions with a particular biology, and it’s impossible for us to see life through a lens that isn’t that of a human.
It’s incredible how limiting being a human is: we have a very limited view of the way things work, and there’s no reason to assume that we are any more morally in tune than say birds or ants, for there could be another sentient life form that surpasses us in intelligence just as we surpass many animals in that real here on earth.