>I think many moral philosophers would agree that morality is derived from
>the sort of creatures evolution has made us into. That's why lions have no
>ethical obligations. Morality is like color: it doesn't exist outside of
>our perceptions, except in the sense that certain external stimuli elicit
>extremely similar reactions in most people. As one wouldn't expect a
>color-blind person to view the color spectrum in the same manner as oneself,
>it should come as no surprise that the amoral among us fail to see the
>validity of the ethical arguments we find compelling.
>-- Luke
This isn't correct. The only way that you can demonstrate this is by presupposing the normative validity of communicative action - reaching agreement is normative. Without this necessary condition it would be impossible to reach the conclusion you outline above, but by reaching the conclusion above you must already acknowledge the moral conditions necessary for science to be valid.
Let me explain that: in order for a scientist or moralist to claim validity for their theory, they must reach an agreement with other scientists or moralists. In principle, this is defended by reasons, evidence, informal logic, data, and etc. For any propositional statement to be considered valid, it must meet with confirmation from others. This process of confirmation *is* the framework for a communicative ethics. If one scientist kills the other scientists in the lab to 'prove' that X is the case, esp. those scientists with alternative views, we don't call that valid science. If someone makes an illogical deducation, we don't call that science. Only when the conditions are in place - socially - to make science valid do we even consider that the results of scientific procedures might be correct. There is a reason why corporations don't hire idiots to run their tech lab, and why security companies don't hire robbers to guard their treasures, and why we don't hang out with pathological liars for noncompassionate reasons. The idea that morality is like colour contradicts the normative process that must be in place in order to conclude this.
ken