Morality versus afterlife

[robvalue]

Roadrunner: OK, so you're talking about morality objective from the point of view of humans, not universally objective. But what is morality? How do you define it?

Indeed, I didn't mean killing someone is trivial. I meant it is trivial to say that given the choice of killing someone or not, the answer is to not kill them. There are no conflicting factors. That's why I would like examples where a more complex decision must be made, a "lesser of two evils" situation. But then, it depends what you mean by morality. If your definition is just "what God wants", then weighing up outcomes from our perspective is irrelevant anyway.

Regarding empathy, no I'm not saying empathy is morality. I'm saying it's a good scientific explanation for why we care about each other, and I call these attempts to tailor our actions in this respect morality. Without empathy, it becomes more complex. Someone without it may have very different ideas about what is a "good" and "bad" thing to do. They don't have the innate sense that you speak of.

But yes, morality is ultimately a matter of opinion. We just happen to agree, as humans, on quite a lot of it because most of us do have empathy. But we don't agree on every detail. I define it as a value judgement, and the judgement requires a judge. It doesn't even have to be a human, many animals have a sense of "fairness". If you're going to say the judge is God, then you need to explain why I should care about God's opinion and how this has anything to do with the wellbeing of life on Earth. If it doesn't have anything to do with wellbeing, then I would personally find it totally irrelevant. Just because something is objective (or in this case, external), doesn't mean it is of any use.