Why do I bring this up? Here’s a few reasons: It’s a big problem in the tech world. Definitely in communities I am a part of. I have been excluded from some communities not for opinions (no one ever cares to ask), but implicitly for the fact that I hold convictions at all.

@XorDev Again, problem of definitions: mixing everything under the same word is misleading. Eg, Social experiments even on some animals show a shared notion of injustice feeling, projection when other's suffering, etc: sounds objective. Same-sex love or out of mariage is total ≠ story

@XorDev What alt-right calls "morality" is totally different to basic social rules for empathic social animals group surviving. BTW their references to Bible and Jesus are indeed just the opposite of what is in New Testament. So please don't mix philosophical morality debate with this.

@FabriceNEYRET If I am understanding correctly, you’re implying that empathy is a good substitute for objective morality? Not interested in hypocrisy arguments unless an objective standard is being used here.

@XorDev Just saying science can measure in other social animals "don't do to others what you wouldn't like", suffering in the view of others suffering, feeling unfairness of share, making peace, etc. It's probably logical evolution selection for working not-stressful life in society.

@FabriceNEYRET So let’s say morals are defined by empathy. If someone is psychopathic and does not feel empathy, they’re free of all moral responsibility?

@XorDev Psychopathic people do behave on ways society consider immoral and harmful even for social pact. Society created laws to enforce social behavior. Concerning responsibility, experts during trial will evaluate whether the person should go to either psychiatric hospital or prison.

@FabriceNEYRET From my perspective, if there is any moral structure beyond the individual, is what I consider a higher order morality. It means that two individuals moral models can be compared and ranked. If there is a better model, we should be aiming for that upper limit, hence objectivity.

@XorDev It seems contradictory to me to say in the same sentence "moral structure beyond the individual" and "two (different) individuals moral models".

@FabriceNEYRET People may disagree on specifics, but they can only be compared within a moral hierarchy structure. Just like how you and I might disagree on a fact claim, but agree that there is an objective truth

@XorDev When you believe that there exist an objective morality, do you think it would apply to all intelligent species in the Universe ? And to smart-enough animals, either social or not ? Does this universal morality should apply only inside species, or also toward other sentients ?

@FabriceNEYRET Yes. The rules are there irrespective of the players. They may be situation and our standards might be different, but the valence metric is the same for all

@XorDev Some species have thousands of eggs/babys that they won't even see, most dying / being eaten. Importance of child life is probably very different then. In centuries of suffering and death, importance of pain is estimated differently. (Nowadays we tend to be afraid of everything).

@XorDev like some terrestrial animals, some aliens may switch stages from unconscious larva to final being. The last one might late 1 day or 1 million years. They might survive being cut in 2. Be social or predators (even of selfs). How could they share all our weighting of situations ?