(March 2, 2016 at 7:58 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: Either way, I see no evidence for any truly objective moral code. Morality isn't really synonymous with the survival imperative, and I believe the concerns of humanity should be limited to facilitating survival for as many as possible - therefore, I really don't like that word "morality", and I don't feel that it is appropriately used in any secular discussion. The Xtian moral code is not an objective one for humanity, not when smarter people see nothing wrong with sabbath-breaking, the mixing of fabrics, the consumption of pork, "fornication" and masturbation under safe conditions.
I agree with this. I don't think there's an objective moral code, because that requires arbitrary value decisions, communication, etc. I do, however, think that there may be real or hypothetical objective mores.
Let me make this clear: I'm not supporting the Christian view of morality. If we are going to look for objective mores, I'd say that our genetics, and especially our instinctual behaviors, is the best place to look.
Our struggle as conscious beings with strong instincts is all about maintaining good function and avoiding dysfunction. The 7 deadly sins represent those instincts, which if they dominate, will lead to dysfunction.
