Nothing in society is eternal, so moral standards must be revised

Evidence

At a certain higher stage of morality, the motivation of action lies no longer in a real-human, even though super-individual power; at this stage, the spring of moral necessities flows beyond the contrast between individual and totality. For, as little as these necessities derive from society, as little do they derive from the singular reality of individual life. In the free conscience of the actor, in individual reason, they only have their bearer, the locus of their efficacy. Their power of obligation stems from these necessities themselves, from their inner, super-personal validity, from an objective ideality which we must recognize, whether or not we want to, in a manner similar to that in which the validity of a truth is entirely independent of whether or not the truth becomes real in any consciousness. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 356 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

By contrast moral rules or principles cannot be brought into being or changed or eliminated in this way. To assert that this ‘cannot’ be is not, however, to deny that some conceivable state of affairs is actually the case, as the assertion that human beings ‘cannot’ alter the climate would be. Instead this assertion points to the following facts. It is perfectly good sense to say such things as ‘As from 1 January 1960 it will be a criminal offence to do so-and-so’ or ‘As from 1 January 1960 it will be no longer illegal to do so-and-so’ and to support such statements by reference to laws which have been enacted or repealed. By contrast such statements as ‘As from tomorrow it will no longer be immoral to do so-and-so’ or ‘On 1 January last it became immoral to do so-and-so’ and attempts to support these by reference to deliberate enactment would be astonishing paradoxes, if not senseless. — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 443 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Social stability must never come at the cost of necessary change or social justice; Moral rules cannot be created or altered by deliberate human enactment — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 443; Religion should consist of principles rather than fixed rules to preserve moral responsibility. (+1 more)

Related

• Moral obligations derive from objective ideality, not from society or individual will (similarity 0.85)
• Moral rules cannot be created or altered by deliberate human enactment (similarity 0.85)
• Neither manipulated individuals nor any tribunal can legitimately decide true needs (similarity 0.79)
• Coding religion as rule-like law crushes moral freedom and spontaneity. (similarity 0.79)
• Societal requirements transform into self-justifying norms devoid of social origin (similarity 0.79)
• Moral obligations require overriding force that natural selection doesn’t explain (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Moral obligations derive from objective ideality, not from society or individual will #contradicts (0.82) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 356
• Moral rules cannot be created or altered by deliberate human enactment #contradicts (0.70) — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 443
• Social stability must never come at the cost of necessary change or social justice #expands (0.50)
• Religion should consist of principles rather than fixed rules to preserve moral responsibility. #expands (0.45)