Morality:
 

Does morality exist? The terms right, and wrong, are products of a social construct. They are meant as guidelines to serve moral behavior. But, if created as a social device, does that not, then imply that morality is an inherently subjective matter? Without an objective standing for what one may deem moral, can morality exist at all?

I think it can't, or there'd be examples of morality all through the animal kingdom. What we call morality is just the most widely accepted norm born through thousands/millions of years of social interaction and evolution.

Unless there is, then.. Yeah.

Why, then, do we adhere ourselves to this social foundation?

I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that since back before civilisation was a thing, those that were too different from the rest were ostracised/killed by the majority. That is maybe how religion became so powerful, because they had the monopoly on reality.

Morality is objective. Morality doesn't exist in the sense that it's inherently in you to not steal from your corner store, but morality exists as a social construct that is greatly needed to keep society at bay from total and brutal anarchy. Our environment sets the standard for what morality is. In the days of Sparta it was completely moral to just leave your baby in the wilderness if it seemed weak. In the days of Judeo-Christian ethics it was perfectly moral to rape a girl as long as you paid her father 50 sheckles.

Good and evil, right and wrong, is all a matter of personal opinion dictated by the environment you were raised in. So the answer to your question I say that it does exist, just not in the way most perceive it such as a gift from god or a genetic trait.



If we were to raise a child in a controlled environment with no outside contact for lets say 20 years, and then release him into an abandoned town fully stocked with things inside of locked shops, I posit that he would most definitely break into whatever he wanted to get the food behind the glass and not feel bad about it at all. (Assuming we've taught this person what modern food in packaging looks like, of course.)

The only reason we don't do "immoral" things is likely for fear of the outcome (prison/death etc)

Some people I could kill and have no remorse whatsoever but then I'd go to jail and I don't want that....

Omg what is this! Do I find myself agreeing with Crysis for once? If it's not apart of someone's reality it won't exist.

:D :D :D

Morality exists, but people's opinion of what morality is differs too much.

If moral decision making is predicated by the personal opinion of the individual, dependent on their environment, in what way is this objective? This is clearly a SUBJECTIVE model.

That there exists a concept definable as "morality," which The Google defines as "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior," is most certainly objective. It's just that what "right and wrong" entails is completely subjective, and varies depending on both the person and their culture. As Crysis said, even though I think the idea of owning slaves is wrong, I probably would not think that way if I had been born 200 years ago. I might even have owned them myself.

There is some level of basic understanding of "wrong and right" that's built into people (with a few exceptions, of course), but it can be overridden to some extent by one's surroundings. Even that's subjective, though, because the innate understanding will vary as well. The only thing objective here is the definition, not the terms the definition uses.