There is no objective morality, and i feel like all of the arguments for it in this thread just appeal to man-made concepts and claim that This Is The One without any actual proof or explanation.
Morality itself is a man-made concept.
- All people are aware of the fact that they can commit evil.
- All people know when evil is being done to them.
- The existence of moral disagreements is not proof of subjective morality. Rather it is evidence of free will. Example: the disputes regarding abortion are not whether it is right or wrong but rather it is murder or not.
- From a naturalist perspective, the universe is made possible by consistency and laws. If these laws were not absolute then the universe could not exist.
1 & 2 - These are both obviously untrue. People can commit 'bad' actions without realising they are bad, and in the same way people can be abused and treated poorly without realising anything 'bad' is being done to them. Just think of abuse in relationships. The abuser will a lot of the time not think they are doing something wrong, that they are in fact doing something correct and justified and fully within their rights, while the victim might believe, or be forced to believe, that they deserve what is happening to them.
Just think of all the fucked up evil shit that has been done in the name of religion and Higher Good by people who thought they were doing the right thing.
4 - I'm addressing 4 first because i can expand on my thoughts better from 3. The universe does have consistent laws, as far as we know, but that doesn't bear any relevance to morality. Morality is not universal, it is not 'natural' or a part of nature. Morality was invented by humanity, for humanity. You cannot compare morality to gravity or any other law of nature, because these laws of nature have been proven with the knowledge that we have, while morality cannot be concluded or explained in any objective way that is above-humanity.
Objects will continue to obey gravity, and friction, and thermodynamics, and whatever else, regardless of humanity's existence, but without humanity there is no 'morality' to speak of.
3 - It's correct that the existence of moral disagreements doesn't prove subjective morality, in a hypothetical world where objective morality exists someone could easily disagree with it, but that's not the case in this world. (also no that's not what the abortion discussion is about, it
is about whether it's right or wrong, but whatever that doesn't really matter)
The existence of morality proves subjective morality because it is something humans came up with.
I've seen arguments in this thread appealing to God or whatever religious text, which, i don't know, i feel it isn't really an argument that really holds up to scrutiny, because just like with saying it's a "law of nature", you can't really explain how
your morality came from God, or why this book in particular is correct. It's a book written by humans. It does not come from any source that can be proven as divine or above-humanity.
I've also seen people say that objective morality is whatever the Law or the government or state says, which, Lol, Lmao, no. Just because a group is in power, and therefore gets to decide the rules and what 'morality' is, does not make those rules and morality objective. Just because an entire society is bound to comply to a set of rules does not make that objective. That is not what objectivity is.
Humanity created morals because people have a will and therefore make decisions based on what they think is good or bad, even if it's a very primitive and simplistic morality such as "what benefits me is good, what does not is bad". For human interaction and the building of groups to work, people have to come to agreements, that's all that morality is, objectively speaking - certain groups and peoples in certain places coming to general agreements, and these agreements are different all over the globe and even within the groups themselves. It is not a law of nature.
That does not mean that what a big group decides on is objectively correct. In fact, morals and laws created by leaders and elites of a group and usually made and followed in a way that keeps the ones in power in power, and compels the ones below them to obey them.
Of course
I have an idea of what is morally correct and incorrect, as does everyone, but i don't believe it's in any way objective or that it comes from a higher-than-man source. My morality is something that i have developed within a certain societal context, and so is everybody else's.