Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Objective Morality proves God's Existence

Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:10:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.


1) That doesn't prevent the conditional: if objective morality obtains it provides evidence or "proof" for God's existence .

2) Prove that objective morality doesn't exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I'd like to hear you give an argument to the contrary.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:23:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:10:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.


1) That doesn't prevent the conditional: if objective morality obtains it provides evidence or "proof" for God's existence .

2) Prove that objective morality doesn't exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I'd like to hear you give an argument to the contrary.

I'm not completely clear on what the argument is in the first place, which is why I want someone to clearly state it first, so I can then give a rebuttal.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:23:10 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:10:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.


1) That doesn't prevent the conditional: if objective morality obtains it provides evidence or "proof" for God's existence .

2) Prove that objective morality doesn't exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I'd like to hear you give an argument to the contrary.

I'm not completely clear on what the argument is in the first place, which is why I want someone to clearly state it first, so I can then give a rebuttal.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.

Now, can you show me why objective moral values/obligations don't exist?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:42:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.

Now, can you show me why objective moral values/obligations don't exist?

Why is it necessary for God to exist for rape to be wrong?
janetsanders733
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 12:21:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Because if you don't have an objective moral-law giver(God) who has made man in his image, then there would be no objective moral-law by which to live by. Good and Evil would simply just be a delusion.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 12:43:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:24:55 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
How does it prove god?

Objectivity implies fairness and a lack of competing interpretations.

1. God is the most impartial arbiter to interpret morality
2. Humanity has many interpretations, and none can be considered "more right" than any other
3. God is perfect, therefore he knows all and will make a correct interpretation

As a result, God's interpretation of morality is objective--in other words, it is impartial and correct.

If morality is subjective, it means either that God can be wrong in his interpretations (and therefore, God isn't God), or that there is no God to determine what is correct and what isn't.

Ultimately, if morality is subjective, I don't think God exists. If morality is objective, God could exists, but still might not.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 9:09:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I've given the theory some thought. C.S. Lewis mentions it in his book Mere Christianity and he credits his conversion from atheist to christian to discovering that morality is objective.

C.S. Lewis doesn't call it objective morality, and I will do my best to do his theory justice. I might fall short because I don't buy into it.

-----------------------------------

C.S. Lewis pointed out that everyone no matter what culture they are from have the same moral code inside of them. No matter how alien a culture is they all agree murder is wrong or theft is wrong etc..

Then C.S. Lewis shows that this moral code is not a learned thing but actually is encoded in us. He then explains that the only way a universal moral code like the one he suggested could exist is if God had written his laws inside of each and every one of us.

I pretty much agree with him that this moral code he mentions is encoded within each of us, but I just credit the fact that any moral code contradictory to that, would have been harmful to the group and the tribe would have had a hard time surviving.

So basicaly I credit evolutionary psychology. Where as he credits god for the internal moral code.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 9:27:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.

?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 9:53:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 9:27:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.

?

Read the book called the bible.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
PureX
Posts: 1,528
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:04:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

Morality is a concept, not an object, so it can't "objectively exist". However, concepts do exist as surely as consciousness exists. (I think therefor I am.) And therefor the concept of morality is a part of existence as we consciously experience existence. So I guess the question is: does our experience of morality prove that God exists?

I suppose it does, in a way.

"God", like morality, is a concept, not an object. So God does not exist, "objectively". Yet, if we can say that morality exists as we experience existence, we can also say that God exists as we experience existence. God exists by the same mechanism and to the same degree as morality exists. And clearly both exist for billions of people.

Keep in mind that existence, itself, is a concept, not an object. So that existence, as we experience it, is being experienced in the brain, as an aspect of our consciousness, just as are morality and God. So that to make the claim that, "God doesn't exist" would be to make an inherently self-contradictory claim. If God doesn't exist because God is not an object, then existence itself doesn't exist, because existence is not an object, either.
Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:11:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 9:09:30 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I've given the theory some thought. C.S. Lewis mentions it in his book Mere Christianity and he credits his conversion from atheist to christian to discovering that morality is objective.

C.S. Lewis doesn't call it objective morality, and I will do my best to do his theory justice. I might fall short because I don't buy into it.

-----------------------------------

C.S. Lewis pointed out that everyone no matter what culture they are from have the same moral code inside of them. No matter how alien a culture is they all agree murder is wrong or theft is wrong etc..

Then C.S. Lewis shows that this moral code is not a learned thing but actually is encoded in us. He then explains that the only way a universal moral code like the one he suggested could exist is if God had written his laws inside of each and every one of us.

I pretty much agree with him that this moral code he mentions is encoded within each of us, but I just credit the fact that any moral code contradictory to that, would have been harmful to the group and the tribe would have had a hard time surviving.

So basicaly I credit evolutionary psychology. Where as he credits god for the internal moral code.

Murder. Theft. Rape. I can believe that those things are universally immoral, but what about other issues of morality which aren't universal at all?
Homosexuality ? Abortion? PMS?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:12:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 9:53:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:27:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.

?

Read the book called the bible.

I have. A lot of times, actually.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:23:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 10:11:36 AM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:09:30 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I've given the theory some thought. C.S. Lewis mentions it in his book Mere Christianity and he credits his conversion from atheist to christian to discovering that morality is objective.

C.S. Lewis doesn't call it objective morality, and I will do my best to do his theory justice. I might fall short because I don't buy into it.

-----------------------------------

C.S. Lewis pointed out that everyone no matter what culture they are from have the same moral code inside of them. No matter how alien a culture is they all agree murder is wrong or theft is wrong etc..

Then C.S. Lewis shows that this moral code is not a learned thing but actually is encoded in us. He then explains that the only way a universal moral code like the one he suggested could exist is if God had written his laws inside of each and every one of us.

I pretty much agree with him that this moral code he mentions is encoded within each of us, but I just credit the fact that any moral code contradictory to that, would have been harmful to the group and the tribe would have had a hard time surviving.

So basicaly I credit evolutionary psychology. Where as he credits god for the internal moral code.

Murder. Theft. Rape. I can believe that those things are universally immoral, but what about other issues of morality which aren't universal at all?
Homosexuality ? Abortion? PMS?

The ones that aren't universal are still justified using an interpretation of the same universal moral code.

For example when peopl say gay marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage then nobody claims that there is no sanctity of marriage they just argue that it doesn't. So in that case the universal code says marriage is special.

As far as abortion is concerned everyone agrees murdering a baby is wrong what differs is people's I twerp retain of what constitutes a life. The universal code is murder is wrong it's just debated how to apply the universal code.
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:31:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 10:12:05 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:53:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:27:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.

?

Read the book called the bible.

I have. A lot of times, actually.
And yet you question marked my post? What is that about?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:34:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 10:31:56 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/24/2014 10:12:05 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:53:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:27:16 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/24/2014 2:08:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:40:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:32:36 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:30:52 PM, popculturepooka wrote:.

Simple version:

1) If objective moral values and obligations exists, God exists.
2) Objective moral values and obligations exist.
3) Therefore, God exists.

Then the strategy is to point to certain salient features of moral value and obligation that make better sense on theism.

Can you give me an example of an objective moral value?

Rape is wrong.
Not according to the god of the OT.

?

Read the book called the bible.

I have. A lot of times, actually.
And yet you question marked my post? What is that about?

The god of the old testament agreed it was wrong. He just took it a lot more lightly then we are comfortable with. I think the quote demanded payment to the girls father for the girl and the guy had to marry her.
dvande28
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:45:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Euthyphro dilemma

I. Is something good because God commands it so or does God command it so because it is good?
II. If something is good because the God commands that it is so, then what is morally reprehensible to us can be good.
III. If God commands that it is good because it is good, then the good is greater than God.
IV. So, either the good is arbitrary or good is greater than God.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:50:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

This isn't proof why man is immoral but it does make many people wonder why their bodies die in this world.

Deuteronomy 28
15: "But if you will not obey the voice of the Lord your God or be careful to do all his commandments which I command you this day, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you.
16: Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the field.
17: Cursed shall be your basket and your kneading-trough.
18: cursed shall be the fruit of your body, and the fruit of your gournd, the increase of your cattle, and the young of your flock.
19: Cursed shall you be when you come in, and cursed shall you be when you go out.
20: "the Lord will send upon you curses, confusion, and frustration, in all that you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly, on accound of the evil of your doings, because you have forsaken me.
21: The Lord will make the pestilence cleave to you until he has consumed you off the land wich you are entering to take possession of it.
22: The Lord will smite you with consumption, and with fever, inflammation, and fiery heat, and with drought, and with blasting, and with mildew; they shall pursue you until your perish.
23: And the heavens over your head shall be brass, and the earth under you shall be iron.
24: The Lord will make the rain of your land powder and dust; from heaven it shall come down upon you until you are destroyed.
Romanii
Posts: 4,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 10:56:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 10:23:12 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/24/2014 10:11:36 AM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:09:30 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I've given the theory some thought. C.S. Lewis mentions it in his book Mere Christianity and he credits his conversion from atheist to christian to discovering that morality is objective.

C.S. Lewis doesn't call it objective morality, and I will do my best to do his theory justice. I might fall short because I don't buy into it.

-----------------------------------

C.S. Lewis pointed out that everyone no matter what culture they are from have the same moral code inside of them. No matter how alien a culture is they all agree murder is wrong or theft is wrong etc..

Then C.S. Lewis shows that this moral code is not a learned thing but actually is encoded in us. He then explains that the only way a universal moral code like the one he suggested could exist is if God had written his laws inside of each and every one of us.

I pretty much agree with him that this moral code he mentions is encoded within each of us, but I just credit the fact that any moral code contradictory to that, would have been harmful to the group and the tribe would have had a hard time surviving.

So basicaly I credit evolutionary psychology. Where as he credits god for the internal moral code.

Murder. Theft. Rape. I can believe that those things are universally immoral, but what about other issues of morality which aren't universal at all?
Homosexuality ? Abortion? PMS?

The ones that aren't universal are still justified using an interpretation of the same universal moral code.

For example when peopl say gay marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage then nobody claims that there is no sanctity of marriage they just argue that it doesn't. So in that case the universal code says marriage is special.

As far as abortion is concerned everyone agrees murdering a baby is wrong what differs is people's I twerp retain of what constitutes a life. The universal code is murder is wrong it's just debated how to apply the universal code.

Wow, I never thought of it like that.
Fine, I accept the existence of objective morality. However, that does not necessarily prove the existence of God, because such a sense of morality could be a result of a basic concern for the suffering of others.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 12:31:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/24/2014 10:56:33 AM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/24/2014 10:23:12 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/24/2014 10:11:36 AM, Romanii wrote:
At 1/24/2014 9:09:30 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:36:05 PM, Romanii wrote:
I totally disagree. Mostly because objective morality doesn't really exist.

I'd like to hear someone who supports this theory give an argument for it.

I've given the theory some thought. C.S. Lewis mentions it in his book Mere Christianity and he credits his conversion from atheist to christian to discovering that morality is objective.

C.S. Lewis doesn't call it objective morality, and I will do my best to do his theory justice. I might fall short because I don't buy into it.

-----------------------------------

C.S. Lewis pointed out that everyone no matter what culture they are from have the same moral code inside of them. No matter how alien a culture is they all agree murder is wrong or theft is wrong etc..

Then C.S. Lewis shows that this moral code is not a learned thing but actually is encoded in us. He then explains that the only way a universal moral code like the one he suggested could exist is if God had written his laws inside of each and every one of us.

I pretty much agree with him that this moral code he mentions is encoded within each of us, but I just credit the fact that any moral code contradictory to that, would have been harmful to the group and the tribe would have had a hard time surviving.

So basicaly I credit evolutionary psychology. Where as he credits god for the internal moral code.

Murder. Theft. Rape. I can believe that those things are universally immoral, but what about other issues of morality which aren't universal at all?
Homosexuality ? Abortion? PMS?

The ones that aren't universal are still justified using an interpretation of the same universal moral code.

For example when peopl say gay marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage then nobody claims that there is no sanctity of marriage they just argue that it doesn't. So in that case the universal code says marriage is special.

As far as abortion is concerned everyone agrees murdering a baby is wrong what differs is people's I twerp retain of what constitutes a life. The universal code is murder is wrong it's just debated how to apply the universal code.

Wow, I never thought of it like that.
Fine, I accept the existence of objective morality. However, that does not necessarily prove the existence of God, because such a sense of morality could be a result of a basic concern for the suffering of others.

I agree but for different reasons.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2014 1:42:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Well, most philosphers of meta-ethics don't think there is a problem with Atheism and objective moral values anyway. This is only something a handful of theists believe in the field it seems. Not only that, but there is no good reason to think objective moral values even exist. The theist gives some elementary cop out argument most of the time, that it is just as evident that there is an external world. Well, that is clearly retarded. I remember when Dr. Craig said that on a CloserToTruth episode and the interviewer was stunned, and he said "wow, that is a huge claim!". I don't think anyone but theists believe that moral objectivity is just as real as the external world. That is just an argument they use so they don't actually have to defend their position. In reality, there is no reason to think morality is anything more than something drummed into us by evolution. For all we know, there is some planet where bees evolved and tearing off each other's heads is alright. What makes us think our "ethics" is so special?