Moral Relativity: Where moral values come from?

No...I am NOT making a religious statement at all. And I certainly am not saying it because I "believe" it is true, because I do not do any "believing."

I am saying there is utility in doing what the Golden Rule suggests. If there are no gods...the rule would still be applicable.

If you disagree...fine.

I guess I was confused by his lip service to 'divine guidence'.

His reasoning here is convoluted. Doing X is immoral because reason A—X causing someone pain—is immoral. It isn't a case of counting A twice. X is an instance of A.

Moral values come from the self-interest of the individual and then the self-interest of a collective society. As a collective, it is an expanded concept of the self, concerned with the survival and well-being of the individual within the collective. The proper foundation of human morality is its common biology, the commonality of needs, security, wants, and sense of justice collectively structures the social contract that embraces all individuals.

Moral values come from Moralavia




















On sea.

"I am saying there is utility in doing what the Golden Rule suggests. If there are no gods...the rule would still be applicable."
---------Jesus wouldn't want anybody telling him he was a son of Satan, but didn't Jesus tell the Jews they were sons of Satan (John 8:44)? If the Golden Rule's popularly credited inventor violated it, then apparently the rule is not quite as "applicable" as you allege. Or maybe Jesus wasn't as morally consistent as some people would feel comfortable admitting?

The "Golden Rule" predates the supposed birth of Jesus by centuries.

Morality online, touchy and feely
The immoral behaviors of abuser / conspirator / hater such as Donkey and Donkey No. 2 are always damaging the profile and future of internet, letting people feel internet looks like a rubbish dump, informal place, even negative thing and inferior to journal. Such guys are really criminal and enemy of internet, even the public enemy of human beings.
Actually the “authentic” / “standard” / “mainstream” including all journals on the Earth lag behind one era in theoretical physics research.

Nowadays, it’s era of internet. The fact is that it’s guys in forums such as Mr. woody, oz93666, Adesh in PHF galaxy, as well as Mr. Wasp in a2k galaxy, etc, trying to push physics ahead. They are heroes / pioneers of the new dawning era. Also, thanks to the assistance of some good men / moral guys such as izzy sir, Mr. From Opium in a2k galaxy, etc, science have a chance to be in the superposition of dead and alive on internet only.
Good luck, human beings.

Morality online, touchy and feely 2

There is at least two non sense threads in this forum, which are not engage in discussion of philosophy, nor science at all.
1. Donkey’s thread “His document the document he recommends”
That thread is obvious a conspiracy, to ALLOW himSELF to abuse internet resource, move unnecessary things endlessly to bury this forum. It’s absolute immoral behavior to crack down others’ chance to PRESENCE here.
Neila9876@htam9876:
You have a thread to recommend little animals too. It has nothing to do with philosophy.
htam9876@neila9876:
You idiot pig head. That thread is obviously to make fun of Donkey only. Jesus, a revolution of physics is underway, piggy even has no time to play with those lovely little animals…
2. Donkey No. 2’s thread “…No one can… think this or that…”
Isn’t that claimed a coffin cover for philosophy, science and human beings? How evil it is. That guy should be sent to the Abnormal Human Beings Research Center and closed there.

Declaration of COISA.
Dec 18, 2025


However, there are some meaningful and interesting threads in this forum too.
1. This thread. Although it discloses the cruel REALITY of human’s inherent PROPERTY: nothing is correct on the enemy’s side, it’s true philosophy.
2. Why human beings can’t solve the problem they are facing. Piggy’s answer is always that: G* at last AWARE he created something wrong. He has no idea how to sympathize them. At last G* decided to give them up.
Etc.
Especially, the most excellent and wonderful thread is Wasp’s thread “How does one PROVE that SELF is an illusion?” It directly lead to a new era in philosophy and science.

The pig is fair.

Context is everything. Christ did not say all Jews were sons of the enemy. He said all who do not become saved were sons of the enemy.

31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

33 They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

34 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.”

39 “Abraham is our father,” they answered.

“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would[c] do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”
Jesus’ Claims About Himself

48 The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”

49 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50 I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51 Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”

52 At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”

54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” 59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

You confuse moral values for self interest.

Brought to all of us by Morality Clause every X-Mas.

An Explanation of the Origin of Morality Through the Three Principles of Eudaimonia (2026 Version)
Morality emerges as a rational consensus naturally growing from the deep human motivation to pursue eudaimonia.
First Principle of Eudaimonia (Pursue One's Own Eudaimonia): The Psychological Foundation of Morality
The First Principle of Eudaimonia states that every individual pursues their own eudaimonia—this pursuit is not greed, but the very way life unfolds itself. From existence to expression, from curiosity to pride, human needs ascend through hierarchical levels, yet the core remains constant: we desire to live well and to live meaningfully. This pursuit constitutes the primal soil of morality. A person without the pursuit of eudaimonia has no need for morality whatsoever; a person deprived of the capacity to pursue eudaimonia is equally powerless to practice morality. The reason morality holds binding force over human beings lies first in its response to our innermost authentic desires—not "you ought," but "you want, and morality helps you achieve it better." When we witness someone choosing dignity over mere survival, enduring hardship for the sake of creation, or sacrificing oneself for loved ones, what we observe is the very pursuit of eudaimonia being sublimated, and this sublimation represents the most vivid form of morality. Morality is not an external shackle imposed upon human beings, but an internal compass inherent in the pursuit of eudaimonia.
Second Principle of Eudaimonia (Do Not Infringe Upon the Eudaimonia of Others): The Social Birth of Morality
However, if every individual were solely preoccupied with pursuing their own eudaimonia without restraint, society would descend into what Hobbes described as "a war of all against all." This is precisely the logical starting point of the Second Principle of Eudaimonia: do not infringe upon the eudaimonia of others. This principle is not an externally imposed prohibition, but a strategic consensus naturally reached among rational individuals through their interactions. Imagine two hunters encountering each other in the forest: if one party could plunder the other at will, both would live in perpetual fear, and neither could pursue their eudaimonia with peace of mind. Only when "mutual non-infringement" becomes a commonly observed baseline can the pursuit of eudaimonia for every individual receive its most fundamental guarantee. This consensus requires no transcendent authority to endorse it; its legitimacy is grounded in reciprocal rationality—I respect your boundaries because this ultimately serves my own boundaries being respected. The social function of morality thus becomes manifest: it transforms the individual pursuit of eudaimonia from a zero-sum game of mutual destruction into the positive-sum possibility of peaceful coexistence. Law, custom, and public opinion are all institutionalized expressions of this consensus, while moral sentiments—shame, guilt, righteous indignation—represent the internalization of this consensus within the human heart.
Third Principle of Eudaimonia (Jointly Build a Eudaimonia-Conducive Environment): The Sublimating Dynamic of Morality
But morality does not stop at "do no harm." The Third Principle of Eudaimonia propels morality to a higher dimension: jointly building an environment conducive to eudaimonia. If the Second Principle represents negative defense, the Third Principle represents positive creation. Humanity quickly discovered that mere mutual non-infringement is insufficient—we also need cooperation, trust, public goods, and systems that can amplify the efforts of every individual. This requirement of "joint building" elevates morality from baseline ethics to ethics of excellence. A person may be content with not stealing and not deceiving, yet one may also actively help others, contribute to the public good, and drive progress. This sublimation is not compelled by moral commandments, but arises from rational individuals' insight into long-term interests: when I invest in a better environment, I am also investing in my own future eudaimonia. Morality thereby acquires an intrinsic motivational mechanism—it is no longer "I have to," but "I am willing," because I see in joint building the possibility of greater self-realization. From family to community, from enterprise to nation, all healthy cooperative networks are the moral fruits of the Third Principle of Eudaimonia.
The Unity of the Three Principles: The Complete Picture of Morality
Viewing the three principles together, the origin of morality becomes clearly revealed: it is rooted in human pursuit of eudaimonia (First Principle), born from rational consensus in social interaction (Second Principle), and sublimated through the active practice of cooperative joint building (Third Principle). None of these three dimensions can be omitted. Without the First Principle, morality becomes a rootless tree, reduced to empty dogma; without the Second Principle, morality loses its boundaries, becoming a hypocrite's fig leaf; without the Third Principle, morality stagnates in negativity, unable to respond to humanity's aspirations for a better life. The dilemmas of traditional ethics often stem from severing these three layers—Kant emphasized the universality of the Second Principle while neglecting the motivational force of the First Principle; utilitarianism pursued the efficiency of the Third Principle yet potentially sacrificed the baseline of the Second Principle; virtue ethics attended to the perfection of the First Principle but lacked the social anchoring of the Second and Third Principles. The contribution of the Three Principles of Eudaimonia lies in repositioning the origin of morality within the holistic picture of human life: morality does not come from heaven, but from earth; not from oppression, but from pursuit; not from the solitary contemplation of isolated individuals, but from the wisdom of shared life. When we ask "why be moral," the answer ultimately points to a simpler question: do you want eudaimonia? Do you want sustainable, secure, and meaningful eudaimonia? If the answer is yes, then morality is the optimal path toward this goal—this is not compromise, but sublimation; not sacrifice, but fulfillment.