Meaning of Right and Wrong... Finally Answered!

[Cerrone]

As for the OP's "blog"... there is no seriously tangible meaning of right and wrong, it all depends on the rules laid out by the society you happen to be in at the time. And if a man was marooned on a desert island, he would make his own ideas about what is right and what is wrong...

I disagree, under desirism all moral statements can be factually true or false.

A man isolated on a desert island can still be judged in terms of the impact his actions have regarding promoting desires vs thwarting desires. If he is alone then his desires can't thwart any desires but his own, and he will always act in accordance with his more numerous and/or stronger desires, so he cannot act morally wrong.

It's still impossible to define a universal right and wrong within ideas of morality. It's true what you're saying with "desires", but that itself isn't morally stating right or wrongs, it's using a selfish impulse with is left unchecked by other means of comparison from other people and it's running free; in the case of the desert island dude.

Kant liked to talk about how ones own beliefs and personal thought should be the yardstick to measure the worth of themselves as a person, but it's made more sense to me to disregard Kant and focus more on "cause and effect"- even if a mans morally right behaviour (by the standards of his society) is deemed good, it doesnt mean he's a good person if his behaviour is having negative impacts anywhere else. So surely moral rights and wrongs, if they were to be rewritten, should be based entirely on cause and effect?

Such as I said yesterday with charity... or even with abstaining from rape and pillage