Subjective Morality?

[brewer]

Lots of good ideas up there!

Anyway, someone brought up religion (@robvalue, @downbeatplumb, @MysticKnight) -- this really can be transformed into an a-religious topic, as objective morality can (and maybe should, maybe even inside of religious context) be derived from reason (think math, thats pretty objective). Not to say that that doesn't have its own problems, like for example the is/aught gap and others, but no problems that subjective morality doesn't encounter also.

And subjective morality seems to have an extra nagging problem in that one can't evaluate anything to be moral/immoral without fully trusting oneself. How do people get around this?


Someone mentioned a common point against objective morality: societies differing across space/time also differ in moral structures. This can be easily chalked up to erroneous interpretation of objective morality; just like ancient societies will likely not be able to solve derivatives of functions, or even understand what derivatives are, that doesn't mean derivatives don't exist and that there isn't an objective way to calculate them correctly. Some people just lack the tools to do so.
@BrianSoddingBoru4, either way, you just made objective claims about morality within specific situations. The question is: can I decide to say it's still not okay for someone to steal bread to feed a starving child and be RIGHT?

bold mine

Are you stating that you have the tools (mental ability) to make objective moral determinations that will apply to every person/society and in all situations?