Subjectivity & Morality

I was having a dinner conversation with one of my flatmates the other day. He's a very environmentally conscious, vegetarian, Engineer that holds some very deep seated liberal values. We were talking about culture and he made the claim that no moral codes of a culture could ever be 'really wrong'.

He went on to explain that a culture criticizing another culture is arrogant because it doesn't account for the fact that the person making the criticism has been indoctrinated with moral ideas by his/her own culture. So for example, you may dislike the gender division culture in Saudi Arabia, but this is only because you have likely been indoctrinated in a progressive western culture where equality is the norm. There's nothing objectively wrong about gender division, it's just a difference between cultures which you mistakenly think is wrong because you've been indoctrinated into thinking your culture is objectively right.

I think this subjective moral philosophy is quite popular at the moment. In fact, I bet if you're reading this right now, you probably believe this is true too even if you haven't gone to deep into the philosophy of it all.

Well, I guess it comes as no surprise then, that I believe this view is not only wrong, but very very dangerous.

Before I let the dog off the leash, let me clarify that I largely respect the ideal of tolerating different cultures. I accept that all humans have a very deep xenophobic core and I think it's good that western societies remain open and tolerant, for the most part, of cultures that operate very differently.

Ok, now for the fun stuff. Let's take the moral subjectivity argument and take it to it's extremes. According to my Colombian ex flatmate, there is a micro culture of splashing acid in the faces of women adulterers. Now, you, as a Sydney resident may not like this, but who are you to say that this culture is 'really wrong'? What about throwing homosexuals off of roof tops? What about extremely strict internet censorship? When I bought these example up to my flatmate, he doubled down, and still claimed that there was nothing really wrong about these acts.

Now it's wroth mentioning that at an extremely deep level of philosophy, I actually agree with him. I don't think think any of these acts are 'really wrong' because I don't think an objective morality 'really exists'. But this is not the level of morality we're talking about. Ok, back to my flatmate.

I then proceeded to ask him about why he is vegetarian or why he is puts plastic in the plastic recycling multiple times per week. To me there was a glaring inconsistency in the way he thought about morality. It seemed like in his day to day life, his entire purpose would be to maximize wellbeing for himself and people around him, and yet when it came to this one specific moral issue about culture, he would switch gear and view morality in an entirely different way. How can you believe that no culture should be criticized on the basis of moral subjectivity, and yet simultaneously hold absolute conviction that your flatmate should pay an equal amount for the olive oil despite never using it.

This talk with my flatmate and several other friends of mine makes me realize that the vast majority of us are woefully unprepared to tackle the moral problems we will inevitably be facing in the near future. It terrifies me that very smart Engineers can maintain bat shit crazy moral ideas with enlightened-monk-level persistence.

Every day at University, I see science and technology reaching towards the stars and making discoveries that build on top of previous discoveries. Meanwhile, I see moral philosophy as a collection of creative lunatics with an annoyingly large vocabulary that are still struggling to even define what morality is.