That doesn't explain how condition one is ok, but condition two is not. What makes that the case? How does empathy establish objective morality for all people in all circumstances and provide an interpretative framework that is able to give people the ability to make absolute moral judgements that are universal, in all cultures?
If you can't prove that, you can't prove that you don't fall into condition two, which entails you are not only a moral relativist, but a nihilist, whatever you may call yourself.
Do you demand the same level of rigor from atheist ethics that you do from Christianity?
If you can't prove that, you can't prove that you don't fall into condition two, which entails you are not only a moral relativist, but a nihilist, whatever you may call yourself.
Do you demand the same level of rigor from atheist ethics that you do from Christianity?