What is the definition of right and wrong if NOT a moral one?

cluckindan 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Indeed! However, law is not a definition of moral right and wrong; rather, it is a spatiotemporally varying definition of societal and judicial rights, permissions and restrictions of conduct which are usually grounded in the locally prevailing morals.

Law in a democratic society is a manifestation of so-called social contracts considered binding for members of that society.

However, law in a non-democratic society can be the complete opposite, to the point of enabling immoral conduct, including but not limited to legal crime, persecution of political opponents, ethnic cleansing and offensive warfare.

▲

cheschire 13 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s subjective. It’s always subjective. A person can convince themselves they’re right to conduct all sorts of heinous acts if they simply alter their perspective enough.

Morals are fundamental to the process.

	▲	cluckindan 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Laws aren’t subjective, though. So clearly there is a fundamental difference between laws and morals. Could we even say laws are the society’s objective morals?

▲

contravariant 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It is a moral one, but laws have no morality.