Can morals exist independently of the minds of moral agents?

[blowfly]

If morals do not exist independently of the minds of moral agents, then morals are relative to the moral agent by definition.

If morals DO exist independently of the minds of moral agents, then that begs the following questions:

* Ontology: in what fashion do they exist? In space? In an abstract realm? What constitues them? What structure do they have?

* Causality: how do they interact with our minds and influence our actions? What connection to they have with our neural network (presumably starting with the brain)?

In my experience, it becomes awfully tricky and difficult very quickly to defend the notion of morals existing independently of the minds of moral agents. Yet the only alternative to this is (descriptive) moral relativism.

Cheers,
-the independent blowfly

[bernee51]

To reduce everything to chemicals and atoms takes from humanity the essence of what it means to be human...

The 'essence' of human existence, like all material things, is only atoms, molecules and chemicals. We are made up of the same particles as a dog. Where we do differ is in the mental picture we make of all this. Clearly my mental picture is different to yours. My world is different to yours. Six billion people, six billion worlds. Your god is part of your world, it is not part of mine.

We come nearer to God through the arts than science in my own opinion...the poem, the masterpiece, the music--as soon as we begin to examine it with the microscope for its molecular structure and chemical makeup we take something away.

The microscopic view of art is all we can agree upon. Even then how do I know that you see the same 'red' as me?

The chemicals and colors exist--but they do not make the painting a work of art. The creative minds of people do.

Thank you for making my point so well.