On morality and reason

[fakename]

I think that it is a pretty well-accepted truth that morality means the acting in accord with reason. That being said, in everyday life, most everyone has demands that another will find unreasonable. But we only think that the demand is unreasonable -seldom do we have certainty of this. So then should you 1) follow your very probable opinion that the act is reasonable/unreasonable or 2) make compromises w/the other or 3) is compromising an act that is reasonable in itself?

 

[dskysmine]

The “unreasonability” that people talk about are often missconceptions about true knowledge. One good example is abortion… people who defend abortion try to use reasons like “it doesn’t feel anything”,“it doesn’t have neural activity”, and the likes… when those reasons could be used to kill adults for example.
What both of the people have to do is base their reasonability in factual evidence. Morality is objective… it is not subjective. Actions have effects. Both of you can see what the effects are. If one continues to ignore the facts… you can only go for 1.

 

[Peter167]

I think your premise is wrong:
morality means the acting in accord with reason

As it relates to your statement, I would suggest that:
Morality means acting in accordance with truth.

Reason is subjective. Scientifically, it could be argued that it is reasonable for me, a man, to have many sexual partners in order to propagate the species. But is that moral?