On objective morality

Claiming that morality is just a subjective opinion and you can’t objectively judge which one is better is the moral relativism that I argue against. By design, the moral relativist suggests that one cannot judge the difference between the supposed morality of killing your children because you were told to and the morality of refusing to kill your beloved children or any person for any reason. When in fact, we can measure very much which morality is better.

The argument of objective morality is not that a “true” morality for all is predefined for us to follow, as if a deity stated it. Objective morality is all about taking a non-subjective, non-esoteric value or idea and defining the clear tools to attain the value or idea. It is not what makes the end result different across people, or that there is debate among them, that makes it cease to be objective. Subjectivism in morality, specifically, is based on the notion that morality is never truly practiced ever in the universe because it doesn’t exist or isn’t better or any more true than another. It’s the philosophic version of agnosticism on the subject of God’s existence, namely the fact it’s a form of weaseling away from giving a clear answer. I generally think of this as intellectual dishonesty.

The practitioner of morality with the attempt and intent of an objective approach does not change the rules of his own code whenever it suits him. If he does, of course he may devolve into subjectivism, but this doesn’t discredit the idea of objective morality or anyone that practices it. It will be his own fault for not living up to his moral code.

Morality is a tool to attain an objective. It is about obeying nature to take control of it. Subjective morality is useless because the universe doesn’t care about a person’s opinion as to how it should be done. It is the idea of chugging Everclear in hopes of a healthier liver. Objective reality doesn’t respect a fool.

Also important to the idea of an objective outlook on morality is that when faced with convincing facts, the premises change. Subjective morality is, oddly, rigid because no amount of sheer reason will change the outlook of its practitioner (because it’s all subjective, right?!).