Morality versus afterlife

[robvalue]

Further to my last post:

If it is agreed that "right" and "wrong" mean how effectively wellbeing is maximised through attitudes, then particular aspects of wellbeing could be compared between the two different norms. Even then though, we're comparing overall trends. Each individual is going to have their own entirely subjective views on any given subject.

It can't just be overall wellbeing full stop, since that will depend partly on the level of technology available. It's not "more moral" to have a cure for a specific diseases available, for example. Although for two societies that have such a cure, how they make use of it could be compared. And you could look at how such cures are reached, and whether the society is working towards them or blocking progress.

If instead it's not agreed to just about wellbeing, but also about such nebulous things as "making God happy", then comparisons will be far more difficult. Of course, I personally would never use such a thing as a yardstick. But some people would. It could theoretically turn out that "keeping God happy", whatever that may mean, actually is extremely important and we've been "wrong" to neglect it as atheists. So if you're looking purely at outcomes, it depends upon who is actually right. This makes any action probabilistic in nature concerning morality. No one ever has all the facts. It could turn out everything humans have ever done is really bad for the universe in general, other life in it, and even ultimately our own life because we were missing some crucial piece of knowledge. But that doesn't make us immoral because we didn't know about it.