There's a difference between believing in absolute morality (which is what most people mean by right and wrong) and simply having the foresight and common sense to do good deeds and not to screw people over. One may be very kind, compassionate, and ethical without believing that one's own ideas of right and wrong are somehow inherent in the universe.

Actually, plenty of cultures have explicit definitions for what is right versus what is wrong. They are called laws, and are generally founded upon abstract principles or ideals.

Also, in order to 'not believe in right and wrong in the traditional sense', one has to implicitly acknowledge that, somewhere, there is a 'traditional sense', however vague.

Generally, human cultures are themselves formed upon little more than overlapping individual conceptions of right and of wrong; that's what the Rousseauian social contract basically states.

However, one does have the right to violate these implicit contracts with his or her neighbors on principle; this is called Civil Disobedience, which was practiced by Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.