How can anything be established as good or bad? We, collectively, agree that certain things are good and certain things are bad. But how do we come to establish and derive the morals that we possess currently? For example, let's imagine a hypothetical society where rape culture is encouraged. If even a majority of the members of this society were to agree that rape was acceptable (even those who are subjected to rape despite their discomfort because of societal pressure), then rape, in this society, would be considered an act of virtue or an act that is neutral to moral analysis. It would be, in this society, unreasonable to question the act of rape as immoral. In fact, in today's society, many people agree that it is acceptable to kill animals for the sake of our consumption (even if it discomforts them). It is agreed, in certain cultures, that this is moral. However, how could we ever possibly conclude whether this is moral or not? Animals certainly wouldn't like being killed.

So, long-story-short, how could we consider something moral? Must a majority of society agree? Should those that are elder than us determine what is moral? How could we objectivity define an act as moral?

closed as primarily opinion-based by virmaior, Swami Vishwananda, Geoffrey Thomas, Philip Klöcking Jan 3 '18 at 17:34

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    As worded, this seems to be soliciting our opinions on the question... There are several different theories of value. Pe de Leao is giving you one of the most common: God. You're suggesting society and highlighting some problems with a naive version of this approach in your question. – virmaior Jan 2 '18 at 4:08
  • 1
    I don't think that, at the level of generality at which the question has been formulated, it can be answered illuminatingly here. Answers are likely to cover a wide variety of views, none of which can be firmly vindicated. – Geoffrey Thomas Jan 2 '18 at 16:16
  • Please, the two of you will not settle this within the comments sectin of a single question. Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Philip Klöcking Jan 3 '18 at 17:25
  • @Philip Klöcking. Point taken and good decision but there has been no fruitful exchange of views. The 'conversation' is over.Thanks : GT – Geoffrey Thomas Jan 3 '18 at 20:51
  • Don't agree with this being closed. Read my answer to good vs bad here: philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/54892/… – RodolfoAP Aug 26 '18 at 16:37

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.