Why people mistake feelings for moral insight | Alex O'Connor

"Emotivism" is bunk. There may be an emotional (i.e., instinctual) component to moral claims. But ETHICAL ACTION (e.g., right or wrong actions) is RATIONALLY definable OBJECTIVELY within a given CONTEXT. Emotions (instincts) motivate action, and they tend to motivate good (right) actions, because what is good for the individual is often in alignment with what is good for society. Outside any society, right and wrong have no meaning. If you are alone, you can do anything you want and never do wrong; that's why those who wish to do evil first must dehumanize others, because if they are not like you, not human, then your actions don't reflect, and you can pretend your actions are not evil. "Do not do unto others as you would NOT want them to do unto you" doesn't matter if there are no others, or if the others are not your equals. Morality IS subjective, but Ethics is OBJECTIVE, as right action can be defined RATIONALLY (without any plea to supernatural beings or even subjective emotion) within a given CONTEXT (like human life on Earth in the 21st Century). We 'enlightened rationalists', educated as we are, aren't justifying contextual relativism or trying to redefine right and wrong; we are defining an objective ethics so that we can create justice and hold people to account for their actions. Only humans can do evil because only humans have the brains, minds to predict the future and take actions that exhibit freedom of their will. Animals simply express their instincts, and humans are animals, but we have a choice; we can follow our instincts, like animals, or choose to use our rational abilities to choose another action. When people do the wrong thing (as determined by society) we presume they had that choice. We don't presume dogs have that choice. There IS an objective (social) good and bad, right and wrong, within a given context (time and place), but there is no UNIVERSAL ETHICS (rational morality), and MORALITY (subjective ethics) generally appeals to supernatural beings to try and achieve a UNIVERSAL application. People murder all the time in the name of their gods, so murder isn't wrong under a religious (subjective) moral context. But ethically (rationally), murder is wrong under almost all imaginable contexts. Right action is thus rationally definable under almost any given context. Ethics is objective, not emotive.