An argument from basis.

[Rhizomorph13]

To the OP, this is a version of the Transcendetal Argument for God (TAG). My largest problem with any form of the TAG is that it tries to ascribe the property of objective to things that, to me, are clearly subjective. As Annik has been championing in this thread, there is no objective honor, beauty, morality, etc. because these things require judgement from subjective agents for them to have any meaning. Take this example:

Two rocks are out in woods on a hill and one rolls downhill due to erosion. On it's way down it strikes a flower and severs it at the stem.

Was that a moral occurance?
Without anyone there to see it was there anything beautiful about the occurance?
Was anything honorable in the story?

In my opinion these questions could only have meaning if the actors in the story had motives or were able to judge. As for the beauty question; I could see that occurance being beautiful were I there to observe it, because I like it when nature moves. Someone else might find it quite the opposite because a flower was destroyed.

[Ryantology]

I cannot accept any philosophical argument which assumes the certainty of objectivity in any way, because the very act of assuming objectivity effectively destroys it.

You can't come up with any meaningful answers if you choose to pretend that subjectivity is not a factor.

[liam]

3. Objective honour exists.

nope

[JosephBowie]

1. Honour to objectively exist in some degree must have a basis for all possible degrees of honour.
2. The most honourable possible being is the only possible basis for all possible degrees of honour.
3. Objective honour exists.
4. Therefore the most honourable possible being exists.

What the fuck is this other than mental masturbation?

"Honour" is nothing more than the hollow sense of self importance in an evolution that doesn't give a fuck. Doing nice things is nice and we all like it when others do nice things for us.

But you have just postulated hollowness in the unfortunate vein of human ignorance which our species has always been plauged with.

This loaded Halmark crap is hardly objective and there isn't one point in human history where a person or group didn't think the cure all for humanity convieniently matched their personal desires.

If this were more than " I can sound wordy and fancy" you could take this tripe to the patent office and win a Nobel Prize in science.

All this amounts to me is the same utopian crap I see from theists and polticians "I like shiney objects".

Your words speak truth to me. I like you, Brian.