Starting from the assumption that there is no absolute morality and that good and bad are stories we tell ourselves, how can I logically convince a racist person that he's wrong?
There is no right or wrong to begin with! Trying to appeal to "general principles" like "everyone should be equal " and such is of no great help, because a) those principles are arbitrary anyway, 2) it is often quite tricky to conclude anything definitive from them.
This is something I've been struggling with; I try to be as logical as possible with my arguments, but I always know in the back of my mind that I'm being dishonest: that what I say cannot be completely logical because there is nothing to start with. How are my arguments different than a screaming contest then?
Of course the racist thing is just an example, in general this occurs every time we come close to morality and ethics; this includes murder, theft, and so on.
Given that realizing that good and bad exists only in the human mind does not seem to me as a particularly bold position to take, I guess someone already wrote about this? About how to resolve this situation? Maybe you could provide some references?
I admit that my question sounds like "Assume that there are no moral truths. How can we discern right from wrong?" but in my mind someone has surely realized the fact that there are no truths before me; how did they justify their moral positions then? (Without taking crazy unjustified assumptions like many philosophers do)