Moral Acts

[The Grand Nudger]

There's no such thing as an accurate value judgement, because the person doing the valuing is making the metrics.

I certainly didn't make the metrics I'm using to determine that rape is wrong.   The effect of rape on human wellbeing is not my design.  

It can only be accurate with respect to a specific metric. I'm really struggling to understand your point of view You seem to be suggesting there is a correct way to come up with metrics...

I'm suggesting that there can be a moral fact of a matter.  We might disagree on what that is, but if we're debating what the moral fact of a matter is were not debating that there are moral facts of a matter.  Even jimmy rapelegs is onboard, in his disagreement.  He simply thinks that there are different moral facts of the matter...and he's wrong about that n this one.  

You can estimate the value of something against a given metric, of course. But that's not what we're talking about. That's begging the question.

That's not what begging the question means...and why isn't that what we're talking about?  I mean, it pretty much has to be what I'm talking about since I'm suggesting an objective morality based upon human wellbeing.  

What does "wrong" mean, without referring to anyone's opinion about what is valuable, and how valuable it is?

Again, referring to someones opinion does not automatically make something subjective.  Their opinion might very well align with an objective fact of a matter.  If that's -all- we're referring to, sure, that's pretty subjective.  Plenty of morality as practiced amounts to nothing more or less.