Replies

I think Ayn Rand proved that man's life is the standard which all men can use to determine his values. As an atheist, that works for me, but her proof does not satisfy you. I have no problem determining what is right and what is wrong. I have never been arrested in 67 years.

You just defined yourself and AR as moral relativists. Can't you see the logical and practical problem with this? If it is true that each man makes up his own moral values (and that is the essence of saying a man's life is the moral standard), and we know that different men form different values, which man is correct? The only logical answer to you can only be "all of them" are correct. You cannot logically say AR's system is better than mine or Stalin's since each man is his own moral authority and no one man's morals can possibly carry any more force or authority than another's (unless you use brute force). You are your own authority, your own god. That means that cruelty and non-cruelty become equal because Stalin was cruel but his moral system is equal in every way to yours. You cannot say anyone is wrong (that word becomes meaningless), you can only say that you do not "prefer" another's morals system. Excuse me, but your moral system is pitifully weak and inadequate.

You mention the term natural rights. Did you know that "natural law" at one time (1600s) was connected directly to divine law (read Puffendorf, Grotius, Blackstone, Locke, U.S. founders), but as time went by, it was yanked free of its connection to divine law and connected only to "nature" - this came as a result of the philosophy of Rousseau ("noble savage") and others, but suffice to say that "natural law" was redefined. If you use nature as a guide in formulating law and morality, there is a big problem, and the problem is that nature is both cruel and non-cruel, and both are equal. Hence, you had people like Marquis de Sade who concluded, "what is, is right". If it is found in nature, it must be right! As you see, I am not a fan of natural law as defined today because there are no universals in natural law, just nature.