Conversation: Can morality be connected to reality?

A Philosophical Discussion on Morality and Reality
Join us for a thought-provoking conversation where we’ll explore the deep question: Can morality be connected to reality?

We'll discuss different perspectives, including moral realism, which argues that moral truths exist independently of human beliefs (e.g., “Murder is wrong regardless of cultural opinions”), and moral relativism, which suggests that morality is shaped by social, cultural, or individual perspectives (e.g., “What is right or wrong depends on cultural context”).

Moral Realism: Grounding Morality in Reality
This is attractive to folks who worry that without a "law giver" of some sort humans are destined to be in conflict with each other and maybe eventually destroy each other. That without an objective grounding for morality society and human collaboration will fall apart. That meaning cannot exist and the only option would be depression or suicide. Under moral realism, thinkers have attempted to connect morality to different aspects of reality:

• Science & the human condition – Moral and political philosopher Sam Harris argues that moral principles can be connected to human well-being and studied scientifically, using evidence from psychology, neuroscience, and social sciences to develop universal values.
• Natural law – Some moral realists claim that morality arises from nature itself, seeing moral truths as embedded in human nature and the structure of the world.
• Divine command theory – Others believe morality is rooted in God’s will, revealed through divinely inspired scriptures and religious teachings.
• Rationalism - that the universe is mathematical and that which is logically sound is accessing some sort of deep truth about the universe. (See Kant, or Plato)

Moral Relativism: Morality as a Social Construct
Under moral relativism, morality is not an objective truth but a cultural or personal construct. From this perspective, moral principles are entirely relative, with no ultimate way to determine right from wrong beyond social or individual preferences.

This view is often attractive to those who experience colonial guilt or strongly believe in multiculturalism, as they reject the idea that one culture should impose its moral views on another. They argue that not only is it wrong to claim one culture’s morals are superior, but that there is no objective way to determine which moral system, if any, is correct.
Different philosophical movements have embraced moral relativism in distinct ways:

• Nihilism – Rejects all objective moral values, arguing that morality is an illusion and life has no inherent meaning.
• Existentialism – Emphasizes personal responsibility in creating meaning and morality in a world without inherent moral truths.
• Postmodernism – Challenges the idea of universal truth, seeing morality as a product of language, power structures, and historical context rather than an objective reality.

Then there are theories in between these two poles that attempt to constrain morality to a few basic principles and leave everything else as relative.

Expect an open and engaging conversation where we challenge ideas, exchange viewpoints, and sharpen our understanding of morality and ethics.

💬 All thoughtful, tolerant, and respectful perspectives are welcome—come ready to question, discuss, and learn!

Looking forward to an insightful discussion!