(June 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm)libalchris Wrote: I think objective (not universal) morality does exist, but that we'll never to know what the objective answer is to most moral questions for sure. Some are fairly obvious: as a general rule in today's circumstances, it is immoral to rape someone.
I agree with you that crimes such as rape are morally wrong, and are nearly universally viewed as such.
However, in analyzing exactly what constitutes an act of rape, and the origin of the moral principles that proscribe the act, subjectivity very much comes into play. Different cultures and political entities have very different views regarding the age of consent, spousal consent, etc.
When the concept is extended outside the realm of human morality it becomes even more so. Mating practices in the animal kingdom do not necessarily conform to human notions of consent - can human standards of morality be applied there? I think not. Would it not be a case of special pleading to suppose that human standards of morality are objective?
In my view, it is of little importance as to whether morality is objective or subjective. What matters is whether it is just.
