most peoples morals are developed from tuning innate biases based on the conditions you were raised

^^^^

why do you think gladiators were a thing. just a product of their times/environment

What things are immoral regardless of how a society see it and how can we tell? @Fran

Generally our 'inherent' or natural morals arent really consistent with one another

morality is relative

Usually you adopt one of the more fleshed out moral systems; And You're either going to be a consequentialist or a deontologist if you do this

our inherent morals dont really say much

I mean like these morals that are consistent across most cultures arent really that specific

Usually its like 'incest is bad' and even that isn't 100% for all cultures

Mhm

Some people thing a more general statement all cultures believe is 'dont harm group X' where group X changes

but that seems a little silly to me, the societies that survive are going to be the ones that generally cherish some group

Whether it be the aristocracy or the childbearers

So i'd say thats survivorship bias more than anything

With regards to if things are universally moral; If you were a consequetialist it would depend on the consequences of the action

That's true for the most part

I asked this because I was having a discussion with someone about if a country were to make things like certain sexual acts or murder legal, would it be morally right because legally it is allowed/majority vote says it is alright to happen.

Id say no, unless you for some reason believe some weird kind of normative cultural relativism, but that has a lot of issues that come along with it

To be honest you're better off saying morals dont have true or false values than preaching normative cultural realtivism lul

I can see why you'd say that

But it really does beg the question on how moral things really are

If 100 years from now for example murder (or rape for an example) was legal and people got used to it and 200 after that people would see it as the normal and moral

Culture and time seem to create morals

I think if you think they have the same kind of true or false values as descriptive claims the idea that the morality of a thing depends on where in the world you find yourself to be is kind of silly.

For example, When I say 'This chair is brown', it doesnt matter if I am in England or in Kuwait

it would be weird if when I say 'This chair is brown' and I have with me a chair it is true in England but not in Kuwait

of course im assuming the languages have equivlanet words for the same things

that is; the brown in the language spoken in Kuwait is the same kind as in English

but it works just as well for say the US and England

How is it silly?

Language is different

I don't see why you're bringing it up

Then do the thought experiment in England and the US

if I brought a chair with me that was brown in the US, would it not be brown in England?

it seems in general we agree on these physical facts, despite language barriers

A Saudi Arabia is going to think of the same brown I do and say his languages brown when I ask him what color the chair is

Wait

for moral facts to be different is to me really weird

where there is some objective truth, and we disagree on the objective truth and agree we are both correct

Because of where in the world we happen to be situated