Reason, Science and God

3: Individual Ethics - Introduction

Ethics has been the subject of continuous debate for thousands of years, ever since philosophy was created by the great Socrates in the 400s BC. Ever since, many great thinkers have turned their minds to the discussion of what is right, such as Immanuel Kant in the European Enlightenment with his deontological theory of morality that predicates fixed rules should always be observed, to the Christian (later atheist) Joseph Fletcher who proposed that morality is subject to situation. All these philosophers have all presented their own unique view about how we should live and run our lives in the day to day and the extreme. However, the question remains: how do we know if they are right? If all these different academics have created different systems, which system is the correct one? It is this problem which has triggered the creation of this essay. I have examined what I know of human psychological development, and applied it to this topic as objectively as I can. In this discourse, I will explain my objective consideration on morality and ethics. I believe that, when considered empirically, morality has to be entirely subjective and what is moral varies from person to person, all the result of socialisation and other environmental stimuli.

This theory isn't the theory of moral relativism. Moral relativism states that morality is entirely subjective to social, cultural and other contexts, so there is no objective moral truth and people can act in the way that they deem personally moral. I am merely trying to explain why morality must be different for different people, and a social construct for governing human behaviour.