How can you have good and evil without moral absolutes?

Question

Some people point to social behavior among animals as evidence of them being moral beings, but good and evil are philosophical concepts that result from perceiving a higher conflict between two opposing forces, not merely being able to observe that something causes harm or benefit. An animal does not help another animal because it is morally right, or because such behaviors have any "virtue", but because the behavior is beneficial to survival of the individual or species in some way and gets preserved. Many religions that are based on enlightenment rather than moral absolutes like HInduism and Buddhism might teach compassion and doing good deeds, but is no concept of evil, in the sense that there is a villian that has to be defeated. "Evil" is really ignorance and spiritual weakness or lack of enlightenment.

Answer 1

You can't. Without moral absolutes, the Holocaust is perfectly defensible. This is only proof that there MUST be an absolute moral standard. We may not know what it is, but without it, there IS no right or wrong. That puts mankind back into the animal world of survival of the fittest. It also throws millenia of social advancement into the waste basket of history.

Answer 2

You said : animal does not help another animal because it is morally right, or because such behaviors have any "virtue", but because the behavior is beneficial to survival of the individual or species in some way and gets preserved.

I agree that is part of it. But as I have had many animals live in my house, I have observed their very close relationships beyond that of species of self preservation.

Like animals, we enjoy the close friendships we create. If you don't know that about animals you should study up on it. We are all animals and use things for survival and enjoyment.

I believe animals are capable of love as we are, and when you love someone, you do what's best for them too, which can sometimes harm your self-preservation.

To know that animals have this and we don't acknowledge it is I believe, one of our greatest downfalls as the human species.

Answer 3

Good and evil are always relative, never absolute. The only absolute measures that can be applied are always based on artificial (though often "reasonable") rules written by people who think themselves leaders...

Is it always "good" to run into a burning building to rescue a baby? What if the baby is the last human infected with a virus that killed a million people in the last ten years, and fire is the only way to eradicate it? Would it be "evil" to let the building burn and the baby die?

Answer 4

Morality is the result of conscious awareness and interpretation of the instincts for empathy and for altruism. True, social mammals with these instincts may not construct moral codes. However, we do construct moral codes based on these instincts because we interpret them as such.

However, yes, you're right. Morality is not a decision of 'good' vs. 'evil'. Morality is a choice of right and wrong.

Answer 5

You are thinking oif good and eveil as absolutes. As polar opposites. directions on a scale. things can be more evel or more good. Nothing is ever all good or all evil. The values are dependant upon who is deciding the values, and what purposes the judgement serves.

*It is an ill wind indeed that blows nobody any good*

Answer 6

Like you said, evil is lack of enlightenment.

Answer 7

Good is that which makes us feel good. Evil is that which makes us feel bad. There's nothing else you need to know.