First of all I use the term *secular* lightly here as it's the only way in my pea size brain to encompass all worldviews that deny a transcendent source for morality or moral truths. So if it doesn't comport 1:1 please forgive me. Now to the post
.
Fair enough
If the acceptability of your moral actions is determined by the society around you then you can't say that other people's moral stances are wrong. Only that it is wrong for our current society, according to our arbitrary preferences.
I disagree. Though the acceptability of my moral actions is determined by the society around me, not all of society's moral views are the same, so I pick and choose which moral views meets my approval and which ones I reject. As a moral agent, I consider myself qualified to do this.
In order to believe certain morals are correct then you need to have a reason as to why that’s the case, under naturalism or materialism, a philosophical perspective that denies the transcendent it’s impossible.
I disagree! If you are a moral agent, this is simple! What I find difficult is to take somebody else's word for it without an ability to verify what they're telling you is right.
You have no reason to be empathetic, you have no reason to survive or live, you have no inherent value. It's all arbitrary now.
I have no idea how you’ve made such a leap of logic but you are wrong. I am empathetic, have reasons to live and have inherent value because these are standards I apply; not because someone else told me to.
According to the modern secular worldview the accusations laid against Christianity have no weight because in the worldview that slings them there's no ability to claim moral truth, only personal preferences (based on experience of stimulus).
If you’re saying according to non believers, Christians basing their morals on their God’s opinions is equal to me basing my moral views on my opinions; I will agree with you to an extent, because unlike the Christian; I can articulate why my moral views are best observed.
On top of this is the idea that social dysfunction (blanket term for the basis & justification for evolutionary morality) = a specific thing is a matter of subjective interpretation. For example the Romans who created the longest lasting empire waged warfare continuously. Something that would be seen as obscene today. If your morality is based upon practicality and what works, then a society who's economic basis is built upon slavery (The Romans) would view slavery as good.
Things are different today, attempting to have a slave economy is disastrous economically. In the USA the South had a slave economy and became the poorest part of the nation, and even to this day it still hasn’t caught up with the non-slave states. Countries today that have slavery are some of the poorest nations on Earth. Slavery does not work like it used to.
In order to call the Romans wrong for building their empire on the backs of slaves you would need a reason as to why slavery is wrong both for them and us. In which case in order to do so you would assume a moral standard, something not relative.
I deem slavery wrong because the moral actions I’ve embraced from the society around me says slavery is wrong.
Lastly, in ANY *secular* worldview agreements upon behaviour =/= why I should follow them, they are arbitrary agreements and need a basis if you want to condemn someone.
With the *secular* worldview, the secularist has to give a convincing argument as to why their morals should be followed; which would be a heck of a lot more convincing than “because my God told me so” which lots of Christians have been known to say.
If a society comes together and agrees that torture for x reason is moral, and I disagree, which one would be right and why?
I will give a convincing argument as to why I am right.
The moral principles are entirely arbitrary, you need a reason as to why hurting people is bad and then a reason as to why it's true. If you have no reason as to why it's true then you literally have no reason to believe it or follow it, let alone legislate it.
I agree! And unless the person you are trying to convince shares the Christian worldview, “Because God said so” is not gonna be a convincing argument