That universal truth however

Is still there

No, a right or wrong is not universal. Polygamy isn't right in some cultures, because of the sanctity of devotion to a single person. A 'universal truth' is one based on one's own individual sense of right or wrong. And then these get influenced by the group's right or wrong, and so on. Then people argue and fight and kill over their rights and wrongs, because they must be right at all costs. There is no other right than theirs.

I certainly don't want that

I am all for discussing things and setting them according to the needs

You certainly don't want what?

Others would kill you or imprison you to get their points across.

It's more like, there is a fixed circle. But it has waves inside which change according to the situation

> Others would kill you or imprison you to get their points across.
@Wolfgang Amadeus Yurmom's art yeah, not a big fan of that

Neither am I, but the world isn't due to being what you are a fan of.

Ik.

Some humans are plain stupid, and violent. They care not for your concessions, only theirs.

But morality is objective imo.
Dossent mean you shouldn't change your laws

True

Morality is subjective.

It is something not objectively observable.

As I said. It's hidden due to the needs. The cultures with polygamy most probably had a high sex ratio or were more feral in nature

It would have been done due to what their culture wanted.

The middle Easterns are certainly feral

That's what I am saying

Feral in the animalistic sense?

Yeah

That is immoral to me.

?

What is

Calling another feral.

Okay

Hows that related

Morality

Is

Subjective

This would come under hate speech laws m8

It is immoral to me, but not you.

I am not discussing that

Why not?

I am saying, a culture being 'amoral' relative to me, dosent change the objectivity of morality

It changes its status of being objective however.

> Why not?
@Wolfgang Amadeus Yurmom's art cuz I am discussing morality only in the context of, how does it affect the law

Law is based on morality. Shooting a person isn't consequential, but it is immoral. Therefore, a 'just' punishment.

> It changes its status of being objective however.
@Wolfgang Amadeus Yurmom's art no. Because you can argue that applying such high standards of morality to a backwards culture would actually be bad for them. And so that would be even more amoral

The laws of morality converge