It is more likely than not that morality does not exist

The concept of morality is something that exists in a lot of modern day societies. While some people"s view of what morality is can be strict, others hold more loose standards of morality. There are many different definitions of the word, and while many of them differ, the common understanding of the word simply means something like "The concept of good or bad actions, thoughts, and behaviors". The weight of the definition is of course balanced upon the words "good and bad". Moral objectivists generally view the concept as a single standard that applies to every human being on the planet, while Moral subjectivists believe that morality can change and vary based on different cultures and societies. Contention 1: Morality is an unstable belief Throughout history, the specific beliefs around morality have changed in many cultures. I believe the change in beliefs on morality comes from political, scientific, medicinal and technological advances. For someone to create and envision their own moral standard, they have to base their perception of the standard from their visual and physical world. Many of the concepts that are viewed as commonly distasteful to humans such as killing, enslavement, theft, etc., are only viewed that way based on the way modern society has made it easier to look at things that way. However if we were to take the humans with these moral beliefs out of their comfortable modern worlds, and put them in a time where many of the same commodities previously did not exist, would a lot of these views stay the same? In our time, many civilized cultures that share and appreciate the idea of morality, do not have to kill to protect themselves, or thieve food to stay survive. The African spotted Hyena is one of nature"s fiercest predators, as they have one of the strongest bites in the world. The animals usually travel in packs and are considered nature"s "garbage disposal" as they will eat almost any type of prey to survive. The hyena"s generally band together and will pick apart their prey and eat it while it is still alive. The hyena is also notoriously known for stealing hunted prey from lions, cheetahs, and other fierce predators to survive(1). The hyena"s do not care how they survive, but they do whatever they can to make sure that their survival is guaranteed. Humans would behave the same way if in completely natural environment under similar circumstances. If the survival of family and self is dependent on committing similar actions, then the instinct of a human would be compelled to act similarly. In this day and age, western society doesn"t have to rely on such actions to maintain survival however. Yet humans do not call Hyena"s as an "evil" animal because of their methods of survival. We excuse, and make exceptions to morality based on context of situation. The fact that morality can be judged so loosely based on context of situation however, made me question why create morality in the first place? What is the purpose? My next contention will answer that question/ Contention 2: Morality and the human psyche Humans are equally instinctual just as animals are; yet possess intelligence far greater than many animals. Outside of just thinking, we can feel and experience emotions. It is these emotions that drive the need to create a moral synthetic sphere to give justification or lack thereof to actions and behaviors. A pedophile is one of the most despised types of humans in western culture. Despite the widely known and expressed point of view, there are many that exist. In the United States there are over 747,408 registered sex offenders, with probably many more that have either not been caught, or have yet to act (2). When a "sexual predator" commits their instinct driven action, they are not always doing with the wanting of harming or hurting another human being, they just seek a common human sexual release. Just as the hyena"s feel the instinctual urge to tear apart and eat their prey, the sexual offender is satisfying his urge. We humans hold such an emotional attachment to our youth, based on our thoughts, experiences, and interactions with them, that the feeling towards a child being harmed is automatically engaged for a lot of humans. This however, is no more instinctual than the motherly instinct of a water buffalo protecting her baby from a pack of wild hyena"s. In a functioning society, it may benefit a human to have feelings and emotions. The rules we make around them even make sense and work well in society. However, the belief in morality seems like a way to safeguard our instincts to mean something more than what they really are, and it is for that reason that I belief morality most likely doesn"t exist. Good luck to my opponent in the following round, I look forward to the rebuttal. (Also I apologize for the multiple hyena references, however I already used them as an example and didn"t want to have to use more than one example to push across the same point). Sources: (1) bioexpedition.com/spotted-hyena (2) www.statisticbrain.com/sex-offender-statistics/ (3)