The fascinating thing there is that Subhan implies that morality -is- a given, when he theorizes a species for whom given morality is different.
Morality doesn’t need to be universal to be a given; it can apply to humans, and humans only. I find it obvious that there exist moral codes by which human beings cannot thrive (for a given value of thrive), and equally moral codes by which they can, again, for a given value of thrive.
The fascinating thing there is that Subhan implies that morality -is- a given, when he theorizes a species for whom given morality is different.
Morality doesn’t need to be universal to be a given; it can apply to humans, and humans only. I find it obvious that there exist moral codes by which human beings cannot thrive (for a given value of thrive), and equally moral codes by which they can, again, for a given value of thrive.