To say morality is a social construct therefore there is no such thing as right or wrong removes any reason for us humans to punish crimes. Morality being subjective is simply a dangerous way to look at it. Stealing being wrong is not subjective, It is objective and it exists.
Get real. If you had a baby which is wrong stealing food to feed it or allowing an innocent to die? Is there a right or wrong in this Q? What do you think is wrong? Is stealing wrong or is it right? Is lying right or is it wrong?
All cultures and religions have their own sets of rules regarding what is right and wrong. Many of these cultures have rules different than others, But there is one rule that almost every culture and religion can agree with as being an undeniable moral law: using force against another human being is wrong. So while I can understand while some things may be subjective, Such as abortion (depending on if you see the fetus as a living being or not), Doing drugs, And telling lies, I believe everyone can agree that using force upon others is morally wrong.
For someone to say that it is wrong to believe in objective right and wrong, They must be claiming that it is wrong to believe as such. If not objectively wrong to believe objective morality, Then it is merely subjectively wrong to believe in objective morality, If such is the case, Then why are your beliefs any better than mine? And if they are not, Then why are we even having this discussion? And if they are, You must be appealing to claims of truth, Which happen to be objective.
Should it be posited that it is objectively wrong to believe in objective right or wrong, Then the claimant has refuted their own statement.
So yes, There is a such thing as morally right and wrong.
To borrow from Dr. Peterson, When you have a set of ideas and arrange them in your head, That becomes your moral code. The highest ideal in all of that becomes "God" for you. However God and justice (submitting to that God) relate to your structure dictates a moral code for you.
So simply by holding a set of ideas and beliefs, You have constructed a moral reality for yourself, Even if it isn't the true morality.
Morals have evolved through time. Societies had different morals in the past and still do today. However, Civilizations that had the “wrong” morals died out. So it seems there is this “ideal” set of morals that we still do not know fully. We know societies that came closer to those ideal morals had more longevity and prosperity. That is why all religions that survived over a long period seem to have a lot of the same moral principles. So one could say personal morals are different from those “ideal” morals and we should aspire to learn what those ideal morals are. In other words, Your right and wrong is independent of what is actually good for the individual and society. (For those interested in this topic, Look into natural law and Kant’s categorical imperatives. )
If morals are subjective then so is being morally right or wrong. With this being morally right or wrong isn't defined, Therefore is most likely on a spectrum. This would make right and wrong so obscure that it would not exist on a general or societal level. What are y'all thoughts?
Morals are not coded into us. Yes, Most of us feel empathy and guilt
when somebody has been wronged or we have wronged somebody (in whatever your society considers being wronged; more on that later), But there is not one clear cut answer as to what being morally right or wrong- the closest thing that we have are a few books written hundreds of years, And even they differ between cultures. So how can we say that something can be morally right or wrong when it differs from person to person? It all depends on how you've been socialized.
Some people believe certain things are right or wrong whereas other people disagree. Lots of people around the world believe that prejudice and ostracism towards other races are acceptable. On the other hand, There is a great number of those who think that discrimination due to your race/nationality is absolutely wrong. Hitler thought that people of the Jewish faith were vermin and should not exist, Just like the rest of the world did up until the 1940s. Now we think differently. It's all perspective. It's opinion. Opinions are not facts and therefore not factually correct. You cannot be morally right or wrong. Some people believe murder is okay. Some don't. So who's right? How can one side just be right and one just be wrong? Because a holy book says so? Because it is a law? No, It is opinion.
Technically there isn't because something can always be defined as good or bad, But if you think about it, Then morality is based on other people's opinions. So there is such thing as good or bad, But it is only defined and shaped by humans and culture. And at the same time, If most people believed that a wrong thing was right then it would effectively become right. So the argument is defined by whether or not people think that morality should be defined as itself or it can be defined based on other's opinions. So logically speaking, There is no one who is saying this is right or this is wrong, We are only deciding that for ourselves.
It is critical to understand that morality is defined by culture and religion, Institutions which develop under different conditions and historical narratives subsequently making them relative to time and place. It is therefore critical to understand moralities differ, From one society to the other and from one individual to the other. You cannot use your moral yardstick to judge my action as morally right or wrong. The fact that we have multiple moralities and somewhat immoralities, And that we have our freedom of expression and individual cultures, There is no sense in the existence of morality. There is no such thing as morally right or wrong
Most people think of morality from a "hurt or help" point of view. They like to assume the stance that if something is purely for hurting then it's automatically 'bad' or 'wrong'. In essence, You have the freedom to do literally anything you want, And others also have that freedom, So if a collective decides that they don't like something and you don't agree with them you're immediately in the wrong from their perspective. So society requires a morality system in order for it function at all, Hence certain minorities that think differently will always be labeled as 'wrong' in the eyes of the majority. Morality is implemented for the sake of maintaining order.
There is no such thing as wrong or right. People have their opinions and no one can say whether it is right or wrong. You can't have everyone agree with what you think is right. People have their thoughts on what they think is right and what they think is wrong.
From the perspective from the person who is doing it, Yeast would be morally right or wrong, But as GingPete said before its on a spectrum, Correct? So as he said it, It would be so obscure that we don't know what is right or wrong. So, Right or wrong cannot be defined, Also if you look at perspectives