No human being is obligated to conform to someone else’s conception of the Good.\u00a0 Moral rules are expression of the subjective judgments of individuals.\u00a0 As such, they can never acquire objective legitimacy.\u00a0 It follows from this that virtuous indignation and moral outrage can never be objectively justified.\u00a0 They exist, not as rational responses to the breaking of objectively legitimate rules, but as subjective behavioral traits that are usually irritating and occasionally\u00a0dangerous to others.<\/p>\n
Does the above imply that we should not behave morally in our day to day\u00a0interactions with other human beings?\u00a0 Of course not!\u00a0 There is no other plausible way to regulate those interactions so as to minimize conflict and maximize mutual benefit.\u00a0 We are certainly not intelligent enough to accomplish the same thing in real time using our meager powers of reason.\u00a0 Imagine the tedium of a conversation in which each party had to carefully reason about the potential outcome and impact of every word he spoke.\u00a0 It is to the advantage of all, or at least most of us,\u00a0that moral rules exist, and that their violation be punished or otherwise prevented.\u00a0 It is, however, reasonable to insist that those rules conform to human nature, be as simple and efficient as possible, and not be motivated by the claims of any religion, whether spiritual or secular.<\/p>\n