Evolution of morality

[corndog36]

I think it is possible to arrive at objective moral conclusions, if your moral model is sound.

But the only way to test your "moral model" would be to compare it to reality. But there's no reality with which to compare since the model and the thing you're using it to describe are not distinct.

I test my model by applying it to real life situations, and it has worked in every case, involving human interaction, that I've examined. I haven't examined situations involving non-humans in any depth, still working on that.

I've never tried throwing aliens into the mix, it adds some interesting twists. I've always viewed the basis of morality as the equality of human beings, maybe it should be equality of sentient beings.

Consider two people, or two species who have developed different, contradicting moral codes. How do you judge which one is better?
The only way to judge one is in terms of the other, as there is no external "yardstick" by which to measure both.

Not comparing them, testing each one separately, if they both work in every case there is no significant difference between them. By 'working' I mean a resolution in which no one is infringing on anyone's right to peacefully co-exist.

You are then left with the unenviable task of explaining its origin.

I'm finding it highly unenviable. It seems intuitive to me, but very difficult to express.