Objective morality

[genkaus]

I think you confuse making reasonable assumptions in the face of absolute certainty with venturing guesses that defy inquiry.

I think you confuse the position of a reasonable assumption under idealistic metaphysics.

I'll take that as a compliment. Seriously though, I prefer to believe my metaphysics isn't really all that strange, just difficult to express with up-to-date terminology.

Its also not based on what we know or what we can show.

I'm basically starting with Aristotle by saying that people do what they think will make them happy. That raises the question of what moral standard best informs that decision? Everyone to a greater or lesser extent recognizes the 'is' of specific factual traits in nature. From these traits, they choose to either cultivate those traits in themselves as virtues or avoid doing so.

The traits of reality related to and required by life include integrity, the unity of parts into larger wholes, and harmony, the balanced relationship between the various parts that make up the whole. These traits can be identified in healthy animals, thriving eco-systems and quality artifacts (products of intelligent life). I side step the is-ought problem by saying that people make choices unconstrained by any 'ought' as to whether they want to go down the path of life or down the path of nihilism. 'Should' is not an obligation but recognizing the moral standard and incorporating it into one's life.

Now, here you lose your objectivity and allow your preconceived notions to talk. Where you see integrated, harmonic ecosystems, others may see constant destructive competition. Where you see balance, others might see constantly shifting and fluctuating paradigm of nature where the constant struggle is to unbalance the situation by becoming dominant and that any balance is simply an illusion apparent in a snapshot. So, competition and discord can direct as much towards Aristotlean goal of happiness as balance and integration.

Further, saying "should" is spelling out an obligation. When you say that one has an obligation to recognize and incorporate a moral standard into one's life - you are saying one should do that. So, here, you have not justified why your moral code for integrity and harmony is automatically the correct one or why one should adopt it.