Subjective Morality?

[vulcanlogician]

Let me ask you bluntly-- what's your position?

He's a moral naturalist... IMO, a failed position. But at least he's taken a fucking position and defended it, unlike any moral skeptics in this thread up to this point. It's starting to get annoying.

Concerning my Michael Jordan metaphor, you need to make a decision. Is Jordan being good at basketball at basketball a matter of opinion? If so, you are a subjectivist concerning basketball skill. But what if you recognize that Jordan is objectively good at basketball, but your point is that basketball is something we made up? Well, then... you are a nihilist and NOT a subjectivist.

My advice for the moral skeptics in this thread: figure out if your argument is:

1) Moral judgements are opinions
-OR-
2) Moral judgements are emotional expressions
-OR-
3) Moral judgements are just plain wrong

The problem is, the moral skeptics aren't taking any position on what moral judgements are. And don't say some shit like "moral thinking is an artifact of evolution." If I want to know what something is, I don't ask where it comes from. If I said, "I received an item in the mail today." And you asked, "What did you receive?" I could say:
1) A refurbished Nintendo Entertainment System.
-or I could say-
2) An item that someone sent me after I ordered it on Ebay.

Which of the two items precisely answers the question, "What did you receive?"