3 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | February 24, 2025
I've been on the idea that moral-systems which appeal to some higher authority/principle tend to do better than those that don't, merely for the reason that those moral-systems aren't a matter of opinion once you invoke a standardization in which all moral values are held to, then you begin to see why moral-systems particularly religious one's do far better than secular moral-systems because the question will always come to what standard or principle are you holding all your moral values so they don't get easily dismissed by just opinion alone.
I was wondering if someone had shared a similar view on this matter ?
Comment by Searcheree at 27/02/2025 at 23:45 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I wonder what the substantial difference of religion and secular moral systems is, as, at the end of the day religious systems are guided by interpretations, based on the contemporary values.
For example, religion, as strict and specific as it can be, eventually gets taken apart and communities pick what they like about it and what no longer conforms with the contemporary values.
Likewise, a secular moral system could indicate the guiding principles, just to be completely outdated within a few centuries, since social interpretations of what is good, as defined by the values of that epoch, could be contrary to those of the future.
Coming back to your point, I believe both systems would likely crumble over time, but a secular system would stand more time in a more homogenous society, whereas a religious moral system would fare better under a less homogenous one.