Objective Morality?

[Cinjin]

I generally make a distinction here between "morality" and "evolved social/consequential dynamics", the former is an evaluation of a interacting values, the latter is the product of selection pressures. If we all evolved to prefer the colour green and thought that saying we like blue more would get us locked in an orange box (and nobody liked orange) then it would be just the same as our evolved sense not to kill indiscriminately would put an individual in a situation where killing would get them killed (which nobody likes), giving them reason for action to abstain from killing and giving people who fear being killed reason for action to condemn murder.

(Your above paragraph addressed the heart of my post so I'll limit my response to this portion.)

First, let me reiterate that I'm not saying all morality in general is a product of mankind's evolution. I'm trying to say that if you keep breaking down morality you will finally arrive at a platform that all humans (excluding nut-jobs and sociopaths) accept on a primal level as right and wrong, ie. objective morality. Rape, as morally reprehensible as I find it, is actually condoned by other cultures and past time periods (the Bible comes to mind). Stealing seems morally wrong, but everyone forgives Robin Hood. Killing is unacceptable, unless of course you are killing the man that raped and murdered your wife. All of those examples are subjective ... so you have to keep breaking it down until you get to a place where people feel the same universally. It's that tiny platform that I think could be where objective morality lies, and it exists there because of man's evolution as a species. You call it "evolved/consequential dynamics" and I think it's possible that evolved/consequential dynamics indeed IS morality and that's why we have such a difficult time defining morality. After all, morality is just a word, and we slapped it on to society and bonded it to religion, not knowing that it was simply a learned condition hidden in the DNA of our very evolution.

Even the most ruthless of serial killers hide their crimes from the society in which they are in. I'm unaware of any exceptions to this in modern times. I don't think that it's because they are afraid of punishment (many often have no fear of punishment), but rather a need to protect themselves due to a subconscious warning given by evolved/consequential dynamics we now call morality.

Obviously, my whole original posting was formed around trying to define what morality even is. Regarding objective morality ... I'm purely theorizing and have no evidence to support my supposition. I want to make it clear however, that in no way am I implying that morality in general is a product of evolution. Rather I think nearly all morality is subjective and only a tiny percent of it is a result of the natural instinctual development of humans.