In response to “Moral Realism: To dream the impossible dream” by J.F.
It is a belief in objective morality, not moral relativism, that is “attractive” because it “validates the intuitions we have when confronted with difficult situations.” That is, it gives us the comfort of believing that our intuitive moral reactions are grounded in timeless “truth.” This feels good. In fact, it’s something I think humans are wired to desire, for it facilitates social cohesion, order, and the formation of identity. But it is, in a sense, an analytical easy way out that rescues one from the psychic discomfort that results when provocateurs destabilize one’s worldview by revealing its constructed nature.
There is no metaphysical directive from nature that rape is wrong. There is only a social consensus that it is wrong. That social consensus is a product of various other moral and ideological commitments, such as respect for individual autonomy and personal dignity . . . which in turn results from thousands of years of humans trying to figure out how to co-exist peacefully and fruitfully. Just because a value judgment is never controverted and is supported by a strong intuitive certainty doesn’t mean it’s a priori. It just means that the value judgment is deeply embedded in a given social arrangement, usually because it leads to socially favorable results. Morality is a set of man-made tools, not a set of a priori truths floating in the ether.