Labeling things right and wrong isn't productive.
^what does that even mean?
I can spend the rest of the night explaining how labeling things right and wrong is productive for the individual and society.
I'm done with this discussion.
You're free to come and go as you please.
I would have liked you to address how you can claim I am wrong and you are right (with respect to morality) if all actions/values are subjective/relative. But that's cool, go ahead and run along.
What you did, knocking that guy out, was wrong but not absolutely wrong.
I still don't know what absolutely wrong means, or why it's important.
Well let me explain it to you. We'll use my example to help.
I assume when you say what I did was wrong you mean it was an action I should have not carried out.
If you accept this, then stating what I did was absolutely wrong would be saying -that without any doubt it was an action I shouldn't have carried out.
Thus, it could be stated it is not just a matter of opinion what I did was wrong. So long as you haven't any indecision in what you stated, I believe we can now also say the fact/truth of the matter is what I did was absolutely wrong- and agree.
.........
Now, going further........
if you define morality as what is right and wrong for a person to do, and right and wrong as something someone
truly should or shouldn't do, we can conclude I violated a moral truth/fact.
The only real question left is did I violate an objective or subjective moral truth?
An objective moral truth applies to all people without exception and it is true whether people agree it is true or not. The truth of the matter will not differ from person to person.
Conversely, a subjective moral truth would come from a person's personal beliefs and opinions and can differ based on each individual's personal interpretation. This allows the truth of the matter to differ from person to person. This means if your neighbor believes what I did was a morally right thing to do, you would be forced to agree she is correct.
So unless you are willing to accept your neighbor's diametrically opposed belief is also correct (whilst simultaneously denying your conscience),
you are forced to conclude what I did was absolutely violate an objective moral truth.
And if you do accept your neighbor's belief, you have effectively given up the right to proclaim anything right or wrong because you have proven your conscience to be completly untrustworthy.
