Section 1.1: The Misconception of Objective vs. Subjective Morality

Many people view objective and subjective morality as mutually exclusive options. However, moral judgments are inevitably influenced by our individual perspectives, regardless of whether one identifies as Christian, Muslim, or atheist.

By examining the assertions made by religious individuals, we find that when they argue our moral standards lack a solid foundation, they imply that we should derive our values from God rather than our own subjective beliefs.

Yet, the notion that objective morality is preferable to subjective morality is itself subjective. Even if we concede to the viewpoints of religious adherents, we are doing so based on our own values, not divine edicts.

To adopt God's standards, one must first subjectively determine that these standards are superior to personal beliefs.

Dan Barker, a prominent ex-Christian, expresses this sentiment powerfully in his acclaimed book Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists. He states that, even if the Christian God revealed Himself, he would refuse to worship Him, deeming the deity unworthy.

This refusal to follow God exemplifies a subjective decision, highlighting that the choice to embrace or reject divine authority is equally subjective.

Claiming specific values as objectively moral does not compel adherence. Even those who profess to uphold objective morality may not genuinely commit to these standards, often falling short of their own proclaimed beliefs.

Ultimately, the seriousness with which a moral standard is taken hinges not on its objective or subjective nature but on the individual's emotional investment in it.

This video, titled "Morality Can't Be Objective, Even If God Exists," delves into the complexities of moral standards and challenges the notion of objective morality.

Section 1.2: The Subjectivity of Moral Judgments

Some religious voices argue that if morality is subjective, we lack a valid basis for judging differing viewpoints. They suggest that a subjective stance leads to moral relativism, where one might claim, "That's just your opinion; don’t impose it on me."

This perspective assumes that society needs an objective moral foundation to hold individuals accountable for their actions. However, this belief fails upon closer examination.

Modern governments seldom assert that their legal frameworks are grounded in universal moral standards. Legislators do not have to validate that their proposed laws align with an objective moral code.

Similarly, in personal disputes, declaring, "I'm right because my view is grounded in objective morality," rarely resolves the conflict. Often, it simply leads to further debate about whose interpretation of objective morality is correct.

Most conflicts are resolved by finding common ground or agreeing to disagree, independent of whether the agreement is based on objective or subjective standards.

The video "Give Me an Answer - Do We Decide What Is Moral?" explores the implications of subjective morality and the challenges it presents in moral discussions.

Section 2.1: The Fallacy of Moral Relativism

A common argument within organized religions posits that if one subscribes to subjective morality, they must accept diverse belief systems. They often liken moral beliefs to personal preferences, such as beverage choices, suggesting that if one believes their moral framework is merely opinion-based, then anything goes.

This comparison is flawed. While personal preferences, such as a fondness for coffee, are inherently individual, moral beliefs extend beyond personal boundaries into societal norms.

For instance, I value fairness and expect equitable treatment from others. Thus, I feel justified in expressing outrage at injustices like fraud or sexual assault, as these actions contradict my belief in fairness.

To claim, "I prefer fairness, but I’m okay with unfairness," would indicate a lack of genuine commitment to my values.

Section 2.2: Taking Ownership of Our Values

Recognizing that our moral standards are subjective empowers us to take ownership of them. This awareness fosters a more thoughtful approach to ethical considerations, encouraging us to weigh the implications of our choices.

Many religious individuals focus on discerning divine will, often neglecting the real-world consequences of their beliefs. They may assume that a higher authority will bear the responsibility for any adverse outcomes resulting from their adherence to divine standards.

By refining our subjective moral values, we acknowledge our responsibility for their impact, enabling us to remain open to growth and change. This approach cultivates a compassionate society where individuals strive to understand and respect one another's rights and well-being.