Absolute morality?

[QuestioningK]

How would you answer this:

There are two Groups A and B, that hold contradictory beliefs about what is right and wrong. Let us say Group B feels it is alright to kill a particular group of people. Morality is subjective according to the person i.e. to Group B it is moral and to the Group A it is immoral. Because it is immoral to Group A, Group A feels obliged to intervene and take some action. But there is no absolute standard - it is different for different people and the moral code that wins is the one that can assert/impose itself on other people.

 

[laircy]

They are making the absolute statement that morality is subjective. Relativism is a self-defeating philosophy.

 

[QuestioningK]

But aside from that, what are the problems with the sort of view of morality that I described in my original post?

 

[Regular_Atheist]

But aside from that, what are the problems with the sort of view of morality that I described in my original post?

None. Humans are rational and we feel empathy for each other. I kind of feel most of our morality can come from the ‘golden rule’ - treat others like you’d like to be treated. In such a situation I’m sure the person who believes murder is good could be challenged. What logical reason is there to think such a thing?

 

[minion]

Rephrased words into bold, because I have a hard time understanding material in “Group A, Group B” terminology.

There are two people, Anthony and Benjamin, that hold contradictory beliefs about what is right and wrong. Let us say Benjamin feels it is alright to kill children. Morality is subjective according to the person i.e. to Benjamin. it is moral and to Anthony it is immoral. Because it is immoral to Anthony, Anthony feels obliged to intervene and take some action. But there is no absolute standard - it is different for different people and the moral code that wins is the one that can assert/impose itself on other people.

My answer would be, why would Anthony and Benjamin feel that way in the first place?