Is it true that there is no absolute morality?

[bennyboy]

Maybe not all the time, maybe not compellingly, maybe bad things might happen someday in the future, maybe there are things we don't know...but the moral opinion that murder is bad correlates to a moral fact of the matter - even though we may have evolved the opinion for reasons unrelated to -why- it's bad by reference to the fact.  What do you think?

This is hard for me to argue, because it goes back to an earlier kind of objective morality I mentioned, and I don't want to be accused of equivocating on it.  I've already argued that any species-wide social instinct based on a sense of balance among individuals must be called objective , since it must have evolved before the birth of any individual person, and is therefore a product of the environment and not of human agency.)

I'm not so sure, for example, that it would be morally wrong for members of an oppressed population to come to the conclusion that they must escape their chains by murdering their oppressors; people must have some instinct to do so, as liberty affects their genetic fitness.  Please do note this is an aside to our current discussion.

Yes, our evolved behaviors and whatever underlies those behaviors may inform us as to how we think we should act, we possess moral opinions somehow.  We've been over all of this..like, five times easily.....

Summary:
You: "Let's talk about that other thing more."
Me:  "Okay, but just for a diversion. . . I don't really want to discuss that thing, because I'm now talking about something else."
You: "We've been over all of this. . . like 5 times easily!"

Come on, man.  Don't be like that.  When I'm already acknowledging that a stream of thought is done, don't dig it up again and then crow that I keep going back to it.

What I'm currently talking about is hypothetical best actions as moral facts-- either your opinion (or actions) are in accord with the best way to achieve a moral goal, or they aren't. The next question should be-- is there any utility in viewing morality in this way? I'd argue yes-- that a moral person should attempt to transcend opinion and instinct, and to search for some understanding of the greater good and how to achieve it.