Unfortunately Mr Harris is not the standard by which right and wrong are established. Nor does Mr harris understand how that is established.
Everybody establishes it, through the very hard work of reflection, experience, and absorbing (but not being dictated to by) the community consensus view. What Harris is saying is that, via empiricism, we can in broad strokes arrive at many things that are "good" and "bad" with enough justification to enforce those views on the unwilling.
That leaves many situations where people don't arrive at a consensus view, of course. But we have an abundance of mechanisms for dealing with that, too. Harris isn't saying that we
should give over to empiricism, reflection, and consensus-making all of our moral reasoning, he's saying that we
already have, and it's time to recognize it.
One can quickly see how his so-called morality quickly falls apart into nonsense
Harris proposes a morality for humans, not for cattle.
™ Version 4.2
