This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Do we need objective morals?

nick keighley's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by nick keighley

Comment 7 by korben :

Comment 5 by Jos Gibbons :

korben, do any of my three definitions of objectivity fit what you mean by the term? I suspect b does because "immutability" suggests lack of contingency on detail.

I meant immutable in the sense of "not subject or susceptible to change". As in, if they came from god, they must be as good today as they were 2,000 years ago, right?

read Leviticus there's a lot of stuff in there that we wouldn't think was part of modern moral behaviour.

Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:10:23 UTC | #950219