Hmmm... this is getting interesting. I knew this would lure truefusion to reply! :DSo, kobra. That is subjective. Animals hold premature "morals", yes. BUT that is based on their biological drive. So, they don't "know" right from wrong, but they choose the one that is most beneficial to them . And you can't tell me why the choice that is beneficial is the right thing to do, because that'll be traced back to its reason. So, there's only right/wrong when it depends on a goal. The goal to succeed is biologically programmed in us. We get high on accomplishments . We are the product. The product is designed to accomplish certain things. The choices we make are based on what we want to accomplish. Therefor, morals are relative. For example let's take this argument:Child rape is wrongWhy? Other than the fact that you wouldn't like it to be done to you (which wouldn't be a valid argument anyway), you can say that it messes up the child's development, but that is yet again relative.Yet again no sight of an absolute wrong or right. It all depends on what you're trying to accomplish or what you don't. As already proven by truefusion, if the goal is to reproduce, everything preventing it is wrong, you shouldn't kick your friend in the nuts, and yes you should be able to reproduce, anwiii. BUT, taking it a little step further, over-reproduction leads to overpopulation, which causes population collapse. If the goal is still to keep a stable population, then maybe it wouldn't be that bad if you kicked your friend in the nuts. Just an example folks. But the point lies here; why is keeping a stable population the right thing to do? Because of your own selfish self tells you to.I would also like to comment on the homosexuality thing, that if homosexuals are born that way (I'm not saying they aren't), then it should show up in the DNA. And even if it was a result of the environment, that is how they are. I personally believe that most variation in human behavior is caused by the environment. Our body reacts to the environment, making us what we are.TF doesn't know this because he wasn't in the chatroom when we were discussing the matter, BUT, it started out when we were talking about the influence of the environment on child's moral values.To be able to make the "right choice", you have to have directions. Human mind just doesn't work otherwise (sorry to disappoint). Now that is a mix of assumptions and straight rules and norms, that is the first part. Most decisions are based on this, why? The easiest way. When you have the directions written for you, you don't have to stop to think why something is wrong or right. Then there's the other part by which we decide, that is selfish. Neutral decision-making is impossible. Because everything has consequences, and those consequences are divided to "beneficial-to-me" and the opposite. You don't stop to think what is beneficial to others, otherwise you wouldn't be able to decide anything, would you? You have to face the fact that people consider the first part objective, independent of everything, although it's based on the second part, but without the 'rational' thought in it. Then they make these silly exception rules when their norms can't keep up with the situation. Like killing is okay, if you're defending yourself. That's not a neutral standpoint now, is it?Truefusion, by factual proving I meant if somebody could show me something that is always wrong, and the 'wrongness' is independent of our own selves. My wording was a little weird tho, I have to admit. I think I was high on feeling very fantastic yesterday with the school ending and all. ?Keep it up, guys!