The basis for all morality is subjective. How can absolute moral values exist?

Question

Is all morality subjective to a point? Even a religious believer chooses which religious book to get his morals from. On what basis does he make that choice?

And within any holy book there are bound to be conflicts and multiple interpretations. The believer must CHOOSE which moral guideline to follow and which to ignore.

"turn the other cheek" or "an eye for an eye"

On what basis does one choose?

It seems to me that the religious person chooses right and wrong for himself just as the atheist does. The religious person may narrow his choices but he ultimately writes his own moral code just as the atheist does.

The difference is, the atheist admits that its only his opinion

Answer 1

Almost all traditions include some form of the Golden Rule. Therefore, the real problem isn't knowing the right thing to do, it is the moral authority behind what we know is the right thing to do.

The God rejector has an opinion as you say, but there is no moral authority behind that opinion. It's like a child's game where we make up the rules on the spot and change them as we feel like doing so.

Answer 2

There is no absolute morality. If it were absolute, we wouldn't need law. Moral is not inherent either. It is taught. That's why some people have a differnt moral compass than others. Where I see no problem with someone stealing because they're hungry, society punishes them and puts them in jail.

I am an atheist, and I don't agree with the death penalty, but most Christians, though their own Bible says "judge not" do. I find myself feeling like I'm a little higher in that regard on teh moral scale, mine anyway.

One chooses their own morality, but that morality is guided by events and exposure to peers, family members, society.

Answer 3

There is a moral absolute. We call Him God the Father.

Morality is only subjective if someones chooses to make it that way - picking and choosing which beliefs they accept and which they don't. However, God doesn't work that way.

He gave His commandments and they are to be followed. ALL OF THEM. Every line, every letter, with obedience and devotion. He did not give us the Ten Commandments and say, "Pop quiz, they're multiple choice so have fun!"

The issue of multiple interpretations that you brought up is a symptom of Protestantism (if you're only talking about Christianity). God gave us a central Church and a central authority by which we are taught and guided. That Church also gives us the correct interpretations of His Holy Word. Without that authority, we are left at the whim of ourselves - cafeteria Christian.

Answer 4

I am an evangelical Christian and I believe that the Bible is God's revelation to us and the guide to right and wrong.

However, I agree that even within that basis, the issue of morality has much subjectivity. Christians have differed for instance on when abortion could be right or wrong, or participating in armed conflict, and other issues. Furthermore, issues where there isn't any real argument, such as murder and theft are pretty much condemned by people everywhere even without the Bible.

The understanding that I have arrived at through much reflection is that because we have rejected God, God's punishment for us fits our crime: we reject him so he leaves us to our own devices. We don't want him so he doesn't interfere. We are left like a ship without a rudder, forced to work out right and wrong for ourselves without guidance from God.

Now God didn't really leave it like that. Out of his love for us, in spite of what we deserved, he has revealed some things in the Bible and in the person and work of his Son Jesus Christ. However, it does not give us all the answers to all situations. What God has revealed about morality is by his goodness and mercy, and it covers most major issues, but no, it is not the answer to everything.

As you say, interpretation also pays a part. It is important not to neglect context when making interpretations. "An eye for an eye" does not contradict "turn the other cheek" when you understand their context.

"An eye for an eye" was given to the people of Israel as part of their law. The principle behind it was that crime should not be unpunished. I am sure you agree with that principle, otherwise we would have anarchy.

"Turn the other cheek" was taught by Jesus to correct people who took "an eye for an eye" as an excuse for holding grudges and taking revenge. In our personal relationships, says Jesus, we should practice forgiveness, again another imporant principle that I hope you agree with.

So yes, I agree with you that it's not as simple as some Christians make out. But also bear in mind that you reject God, so you can't hold him to blame for your lack of knowledge of right and wrong.

Answer 5

There is a difference between trying to APPLY morality then DEFINE morality. Gods essence defines the very nature of good and evil but doesnt apply it to our lives. That is our task and responsibility.

You need to be able to distinguish between general morality and specific commands. Specific commands will have a general bearing and relationship to general morality but they arent one of the same if that makes any sense. For instance, "eye for an eye" is based on the idea that A. Transgression is wrong B. Its the law that needs to expose and convict of sin. C. Justice needs to be served.

"Turn the other cheek" is a personal command given not to govt or the law, but as merciful agents of Christ that arent mandated or called to dispense justice or revenge.

We may apply morality differently but morality itself is set in stone by Gods character and virtue of his creation. Just as 1+1 always will equal 2, murder will always be wrong.

Answer 6

I don't bother with morality at all.

I don't claim anything is right or wrong before time.... but rather make my decision in any given situation when that situation becomes the present.
And it is simply that: a decision of action; not some overriding judgement of the situation itself.

And I'm far better off for it.

But yes.
Morality is subjective.
Truth is subjective.
There is no individual thing out there that isn't subjective.

Answer 7

The basis for morality may well be genetic. Since we evolved from social animals and are social animals ourselves, we have a predisposition for behavior which is beneficial to the society in which we live. This is not to say that we are rigidly compelled to behave in certain ways, there is a great deal of flexibility.

Answer 8

The difference is, the Christian comes to the Lord just as he is with all his sin and baggage, and the Holy Spirit comes in and begins the moral clean up. What the Holy Spirit begins in a person, the Holy Spirit is more than able to finish.

We only need to please God and no other person.

Answer 9

Morality is about value judgments, or it's not morality at all. Value judgments are, by definition, subjective judgments about what we, as individuals, value. Therefore morality is necessarily subjective and cannot be anything else.

Answer 10

They exist. In certain forms of governments the morals are dictated by the leader(s), and enforced in an "efficient" manner.