Objective morality

[genkaus]

Maybe I don't fully understand. Suppose I believe the Karma Sutra is a divinely revealed text. How do I really know it's a product of revelation or just another...mmhuh...self-help book? Likewise if I see a vision of Thor, which would be awesome by the way, I would use my rational capacity trying to decide if those mushrooms I ate were 'blue meanies' or if it actually was the son of Odin.

But rational inquiry will not help you there. Since it is imperfect, it may identify a false revelation as true or a true one as false. You'd simply have to take it on faith.

---

I see morality as less about finding a set of fixed universal rules for behaviour and more about choosing sides with reference to a recognizable moral standard to which I refer. Such a moral standard would be an at least partially discernable part of reality. I see in reality a creative self-organizing principle struggling to overcome entropy. The creative side, at all levels of reality strives to form wholes from disparate parts: harmonious integrity. Once I have learned to recognize that inherently creative trait of reality, I face the Choice. Do I become a Jedi or a Sith? While I might not make an explicit decision, my actions would still reveal a tacit preference. Either I align myself with effort of reality to manifest harmonious integrity or I give in to the pressures driving everything into chaos and disintegrity. While an Aristotelian pursuit of happiness serves as motivation to seek virtue the standard for evaluative virtue, in people and of situations, is the degree of harmonious integrity found. I could say much more about this but I wanted to put it out there for you all.

You lose me about halfway through. As said before Ethics would depend upon metaphysics and epistemology and you seem to have some weird metaphysical ideas which give rise to our morality. So, what do you mean by "harmonious integrity" and how does this overcome Hume's is-ought problem?