Ah, the classic ‘logic of conventional wisdom’ argument. One might be tempted to say that the retort disagrees with my idea, but I would suggest that UrRong. While some aspects of morality may be rooted in the shared values of a given society, killing, sexual violence, racism, adultery, lying, cheating, stealing and pillaging are all wrong due to their inherent nature rather than solely due to societal pressure. The shared values of a society may have been developed in part to discourage these acts, and certainly can influence our moral beliefs, but the idea that all morality is based on culture or convention is not objectively true.
Thirdly, take the argument about killing: it is wrong regardless of any potential legal consequences or fear of retribution, as killing another living being inherently undermines the right to life and liberty, which is an inalienable right. While it may be true that some animals kill one another, this doesn’t negate the fact that humans are endowed with ethical capabilities that allow us to recognize that this act is wrong. Therefore, it is an objective moral belief that killing is wrong, not just a subjective personal preference.
Similarly, sexual violence is seen as morally wrong because it violates the right to bodily autonomy, racism is wrong because it denies individuals their right to equality and respect, and adultery is wrong because it violates the trust and commitment of a relationship. In each case, there are objective reasons why these actions are considered immoral.
In conclusion, while certain cultural values may influence our moral beliefs, it is incorrect to suggest that all morality is based solely on convention or culture. The truth is that morality has both an objective basis and a subjective basis; at the end of the day, both are equally important in forming our moral beliefs. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go find me a chisel and a fat spliff so I can get God’s number two rule carved in stone: “Don’t disagree with Nikhil—UrRong!”