I am sympathetic to your argument, but would take it farther. A person has no obliation to others, whatsoever, period. Anyone who disagrees would have to over

I am sympathetic to your argument, but would take it farther. A person has no obliation to others, whatsoever, period. Anyone who disagrees would have to overcome the burden of proof. (Which you can't, by the way, since I know things that would contradict a positive argument for obligation to others as it is generally conceived.) --- Practically everybody makes moral assumptions purely based on emotions, possibly with some post-hoc rationalizations. But our emotions didn't have to be what they were---they vary between time periods, cultures, and individuals. Emotions are the product of premises that one has accepted, rationally or (for the most part today) irrationally.