Proof is absolute confirmation of the case in point, not the disproof of an arguement.
What makes your morality universal, and hence applicable to another?
Mr. Baggins:
a) 1+1=2, everything else is personal opinion.
b) I am writing an opinion right now.
c) That opinion is shared by the entirety of the scientific community.
c has no merit. Why should we care about the entirety of the scientific community if this is merely opinion?
Secondly, c is not shared by the entire scientific community. Science plays no role in the realm of ethics or morality, although moral concerns define research ethics and funding patterns.
This does not mean that there is no ethics, just because science cannot prove or disprove ethical maxims. For this reason, there are different rationales behind truth claims in ethics, and truth claims in science.
Your question regarding moral absolutes is good. I'm interested to see how Agathon's answer differs from mine.
Christian ethics assume the existence of God, who is omnipotent, omniscient and good. As we are all creations of this God, violating his rules harms us physically and emotionally. While we may deny his existence, these harms remain to indicate our bondage.
In this sense, morality is absolute, and applies to everyone, even those who do not believe in God.
Comment