Morality is standard-based rather than based on some concrete factual source that determines what is right and what is wrong. So it varies in standard with culture, individual, and time.
What may be right for one person may be wrong for another. What may have been right in the past is no longer right in the present. What is accepted as right in one society or culture is unacceptable in another.
Arthur's overall argument fails because he is trying to make morality a logic thing when it is more about what standards one is following when it could be drastically different from Arthur's standards.
Many people here, for example, respect a human being's right to make decisions concerning their own body and that it's immoral to deprive them of that right. Arthur, on the other hand, may not have that empathy to appreciate why many people find it morally permissible to allow abortion (at least in earlier stages of pregnancy). But that is his problem and he has no compelling argument as to why any of us should consider his view as the more reasonable one.
What may be right for one person may be wrong for another. What may have been right in the past is no longer right in the present. What is accepted as right in one society or culture is unacceptable in another.
Arthur's overall argument fails because he is trying to make morality a logic thing when it is more about what standards one is following when it could be drastically different from Arthur's standards.
Many people here, for example, respect a human being's right to make decisions concerning their own body and that it's immoral to deprive them of that right. Arthur, on the other hand, may not have that empathy to appreciate why many people find it morally permissible to allow abortion (at least in earlier stages of pregnancy). But that is his problem and he has no compelling argument as to why any of us should consider his view as the more reasonable one.
