- PaulLv 73 weeks ago
"Right and wrong" have more than one meaning. There are objectively right and wrong ways to jack up a car, or install a door, or plant a lawn. However, when it comes to morality, theists consider right and wrong objective, as defined by God, while atheists see morality as subjective, something we decide, based largely on what is convenient or useful or pleasurable.
- 4 weeks ago
No, it is not subjective, it's just best kept simple. When you want to go right and you go left, you took the wrong turn. It's not difficult to see that when you reach the objective that was desired that is called right, or correct, and when you do not satisfy the objective that is wrong. People drag complicated scenarios around trying to "do right", and then they forget what the objective was and then they are lost. We aren't all knowing beings, and we aren't very smart on the average, so when it comes to knowing what is the right course of action it is difficult to know how to get to our objective. Simple, practical and honest is the best we can do given our resources at the moment.
- DaveLv 54 weeks ago
No. Right and wrong are whatever Jesus says.
- the peacemakersLv 61 month ago
I believe its more of a matter of ones own opinion.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- goplainLv 42 months ago
Yes, it is. But :
" Out beyond ideas of WRONG DOING and RIGHT DOING, there is a field. I will meet you there."
- JocelyneLv 52 months ago
To some extent they are subjective, but something done to harm another is definitely wrong.
Harming others is a bad thing to be avoided.
- martinLv 72 months ago
Yes, in most cases, the moral choice between right and wrong has to do with your own personal morals, plus the opinions of society as a whole.
- Mr. SmartypantsLv 72 months ago
A lot of the time, yes. Some people are 'moralists', they believe morals are obvious and eternal, and we all know what they are and we all choose to follow them or not. But the closer you look at morals the more complicated they seem. And even moralists will make subjective decisions and claim they're objective eternal unmistakable moral decisions.
Our 'absolute' morals change over time! We subvert morals to more temporary, more 'important' considerations. This is how Pro Lifers justify wiping out whole villages of women and children. This is how Christians who believed in individual freedoms justified slavery for a couple thousand years. Or how Jews, who were themselves victims of a terrible holocaust only a couple generations ago, now treat Palestinians in a lot of the same ways.
- robert2020Lv 62 months ago
It is. But only largely. I think there are certain universals, not based on any religious writings. Most people would agree upon certain things without much exception.
For example: It would be morally wrong to enslave anybody, for any reason.