Yes, but the focus of this thread is to explore the extent to which folks do what they do because 1] they feel obligated morally to do so or 2] they concern themselves more with the consequences of getting caught by those convinced that particular behaviors are in fact the “wrong thing to do”.
Sure, there are those who feel that certain behaviors are immoral but do them anyway. Why? Because for one or another reason they are able to rationalize it. Including aborting their unborn babies. Maybe they feel it is wrong to kill unborn babies but their own unborn baby was as a result of rape; or it will come into the world with some affliction; or they are convinced that if they sincerely repent to God they will be forgiven.
The actual contextual permutations that any one of us might find ourselves in “out in the world” – out in a particular world viewed from a particular point of view – are practically endless.
After all, what do we really know of the experiences that others might have – experiences entirely at odds with our own?
And all because folks like you insist that there really is a way to differentiate moral from immoral behaviors.
Yeah, it’s because of people like me that there are so many problems in the world. If only there were no values or judgements, then we would be living in paradise.
“Anything and everything is okay”. That’s the solution.
You argue this, but I can scarcely imagine how you could possibly believe this is true given the length and breadth of our exchanges here.
I would never suggest that we are better off living in a world without values and judgments. Note a single instance where I have argued this. Instead, I argue that value judgments are a necessary component in a world where “rules of behavior” are fundamental to sustaining least dysfunctional human interactions. I merely argue that “here and now” I construe any particular individual values as embodied in existential contraptions rooted in the manner in which I in turn construe the meaning of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy. And ever and always out in a particular world [historically, culturally and experientially] of contingency chance and change.
And that as a result of having “thought” myself into believing that this is true “in my head” “here and now” I am impaled on my dilemma above.
So the question is the extent to which your own moral values are derived from a different set of assumptions. The extent to which my own predicament is not applicable to you. As that pertains to a particular set of behaviors that you have chosen in interacting with others.
You claim to have gone there. But certainly not in the manner in which I construe the meaning of “going there”. And that is embedded in my existential trajectory above.