Do you wish there's a god?

[Acrobat]

It is internally consistent according to the system that describes it. In a different system, 1 + 1 = 10 And that is also true and internally consistent with that system. You should know. 1 + 1 = 10 is the system you are posting with right now.

You seem to be appealing to a different set of bases, which is akin to using a different language, to express the same thing. Instead of saying one, you’re saying dos, or to use your example, instead of saying two, you’re saying one-zero.

1+1=2 with base 10, can be expressed as 1+1=10 with base 2. Both of which indicate that if I have one apple and obtain an additional apple, I’ll have two apples, and not ten apples.

Both.
If we take the principle (subjectively) of "do no harm" as a moral foundation, the according to that subjective principle, we can say that torturing babies is objectively immoral under that system.


Nope. It depends what the moral foundation you use actually is. Once that is identified, objective assessments can be made as to whether any act meets that standard or fails it. Thus to continue the previous example, if the moral foundation is to "do no harm" then objectively, torturing babies is is immoral in that system. Expressing a pizza preference does no harm and is thus perfectly and objectively moral from that foundation.

This is not rocket magic.

The Michelin guides analysis of food and restaurant experiences use a variety of objective criteria, to define what constitutes as great. This doesn’t mean that the restaurants that it defines as great are objectively great.

The things you find subjectively good like pizza, don’t magically become objectively good by outlining a measurable criteria for what it takes for you to consider it good.

What you and others are doing is equivocating between measurable observations, and subjective judgements.

Spotify predicts the type of music I like based on algorithm, that takes into account the various types of music I listen to, and finds suggestion based on objective features of the songs I like. This doesn’t mean the songs I like are any less subjectively good, or that my subjective preferences are transformed into objective truths.

It can’t be objectively true that torturing innocent babies for fun is wrong, if it’s only true for those who subscribe to a particular moral perspective.

---

Both.
If we take the principle (subjectively) of "do no harm" as a moral foundation, the according to that subjective principle, we can say that torturing babies is objectively immoral under that system.

See...implicit reference to realism.  "Harm".  Torturing babies is only immoral in that system if torturing babies is harmful.  There's something about torturing babies that "makes it bad".  That's the moral aim of a harm based system, even if that moral aim doesn't provide uniform compulsion.

And what makes harm immoral?