Why it's important to know there is an objective morality.

[robvalue]

Sure, I see what you are saying. Thanks for the explanation I agree that when you have useful, agreed objective standards, these are more reliable than judgement calls in many situations.

I don't see how "objective morality" is supposed to make someone a better person, though. Sure, someone could write down a bunch of rules they have to follow. But who gets to write it down, and who says those rules are the best ones?

If you're doing an action "because it's objectively moral", and not because it's a conclusion you've come to yourself, then you're being amoral. It's mindless obedience. Any set of nonsense could be written down, and becomes a form of "objective morality". Unless multiple people all agree on those principles, it isn't of any use as far as I can see. And even then, everyone interprets principles and situations differently. Covering every possible scenario is monumentally impractical. It would amount to something resembling computer code. People will either ignore it when they disagree, or be forced to live by it (theocracy). This is different to laws, which aren't meant to reflect morality at all.

For one thing, I've never heard anyone explain how you can objectively bring animals into morality. How much do they matter, in relation to humans? How much are their lives worth? How much does their suffering matter, compared to human suffering? How much is their happiness worth, compared to ours? I'm suggesting there is no correct answer to this. The answers range from "don't matter at all" to "matter as much as is practically possible".