Subjective Morality?

[The Grand Nudger]

Of course a person can pick what they ought to do, according to themselves. That’s trivially true. What they can’t do is pick the "correct" way to decide what to do, because that’s meaningless. That’s the is/ought problem.

"Is/ought" contends that a person requires at least one evaluative premise to traverse the logical space between the two with a valid means of inference.  Further, the contention states that no statement of fact necessarily entails an evaluative premise. If both of these contentions are true, then there are no value neutral judgments for evaluative conclusions.  This wouldn't be true solely of moral evaluation, btw, but all evaluative conclusions (or, if it were solely true of moral evaluation...some explanation as to why it is the exception or outlier is needed).  The contention that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow requires and contains silent evaluative premises just as much as any moral conclusion.  Both statements satisfy the condition of evaluative premises.

Supposing the open question and assuming that no evaluative premise necessarily entails from a statement of fact is not incompatible with discovering that, in point of fact,all x is good (or bad)

So, right off the bat, the objection does not and cannot contend that there can be no moral facts, or that there can be no "correct way", or that any such discussion is meaningless.  Is/ought describes the difficulty, the bar, the floor, if you will..and proposes that the matter of evaluative premises is both required for any valid argument, and a subject open for discussion and debate (ofc it is), but it does not presuppose that there is or can be no resolution to that debate.

It is not some rule that makes moral realism an impossibility. I know this might add complication to the mix...but moral realism doesn't contend that there is only one "right way", it simply puts constraints on whatever "right ways" you might come up with, as does is/ought. A moral realist can also be a moral pluralist. The crushing majority are. That you hear so much about one evaluative premise or another is more for convenience. It would take hours to talk around the entirety of moral theory just to make a comment that you could express simply with a single example from a single metric.