Final answer:
The sources of our knowledge about right and wrong are shaped by evolution, cultural influences, rational inquiry, and testimonial knowledge. Philosophers like Socrates have attempted to find a basis for morality in objective reason beyond moral absolutism and cultural relativism.
Step-by-step explanation:
The sources of our knowledge about what constitutes right and wrong within our professional community are diverse and multi-faceted. Philosophers have grappled with whether there are objective sources of moral knowledge. Some argue that our intuitive judgments of right and wrong are influenced by our cultural environment but are also a result of millions of years of evolution, similar to our language and mathematics abilities.
This aligns with the concept of neuroethics and findings such as those from the Trolley Dilemma studies. Moreover, testimonial knowledge, or knowledge gained through the testimony of others, plays a significant role in how we determine what is morally correct, although it is acknowledged that testimony can sometimes be unreliable.
The failure of many individuals to think beyond moral absolutism and cultural relativism has spurred philosophers to seek a third alternative, touching upon Socrates' rejection of both the mythopoetic thought and relativism of his era. Socrates, along with others in Western philosophy, have sought to find universal moral principles through the use of reason. The critique of theories that equate morality with self-serving exercises of power points to the necessity for societies to find a moral foundation beyond mere relativism.
In summary, our morality is partly an inheritance of our evolutionary past, shaped deeply by culture but also by rational inquiry and the testimonies of others, continually questioning the justifications for our moral beliefs and the ethical frameworks that underpin our professional and societal norms.