We should take the Moral Highground

[mediamogul]

I'm not familiar with Aristotle at all (I know who he is though of course). Did he acknowledge that the thing that 'ought' to be done (pursuing happiness) was an assumption? If so, I agree. If he thought it was some sort of self-evident truth I totally disagree.

To paraphrase the Nichomachean Ethics, "Happiness is the good that all men desire." From there he goes on to give examples showing that the pursuit of pleasures, money and fame are sought because people believe those things will make them happy. His general approach is empirical, but you still get the impression that Aristotle thought of it as self-evident. After all who would want to be unhappy.

The point also works conversely in that people avoid "suffering". To me all sentient beings are afforded rights because of their ability to suffer. These things are not arbitrary and are related to human nature and biology. Couple this with others treating others as "ends in themselves" instead of means to an end and you have the rational basis for ethics. Ethics being normative in the sense that they demonstrate how people ought to act as defined by good and bad.

I responded to one of your earlier posts with essentially this same argument. I for one do not believe in complete "moral relativism" in the sense that morality is purely capricious and arbitrary. It is instead based on reason and human nature, if one does not believe in divine command then inevitably it will be based upon those two things.