On Moral Authorities

[robvalue]

Sure, we all develop our own morality and we use one or more systems as a basis. Whatever way you look at it, we're choosing our own moral system from an infinite number of possible ones. There's no way to objectively rank any of them without first agreeing on what the goals of morality should be, and even then, it's not realistic to have a goal so explicitly laid out that you can actually make direct comparisons. And anyone who doesn't agree with the goals, as laid out, is simply excluded from the discussion. That's not a discussion about morality, it's a discussion about practicality.

Where morality becomes difficult, and for some reason this is most never discussed by proponents of objective morality, is when outcomes or resources come into conflict. When a compromise must be reached. How do you determine what is the best compromise? Everyone will have their own opinion, and without agreeing some actual metrics, it can't be calculated. If you do define the metrics, that's no use to me if I don't agree with your metrics.

I don't understand what you're getting at with your first question. The truth is correct in a tautological sense; further than that I don't know how it relates to what I said. Please see my above discussion

I meant is it morally right to tell the truth.

If you're asking me my opinion, then yes, I consider it moral to tell the truth in most situations. Each situation is different and complex though. But my opinion is irrelevant to morality as a concept.