Message from @Summī Imperator, 呪い殿
Discord ID: 487391786583719986
A document would be the application of the morality
I asked those questions because you said it should not be a "who" that decides what is Just
Which implies it should be a what.
A paper is written by a who
Then, pray thee tell, do you suggest be proof of this objective morality?
That is a philosophical question
No, it is a question that directly relates to your *opinion* that there is an objective morality.
That there is one morality that presides all others.
And takes precedence.
I'm asking what it is, and how is it free from interpretation?
We should be able to logically deduce the objective morality, which is a question of philosophy.
Unfortunately, humans are not perfectly logical creatures. We cannot achieve perfect objectivity in our moral systems.
Morality is not logical as there is no system to validate what is moral, and immoral.
I already provided two: natural rights and evolutionary psychology
So, morality is a human concept, and as such you have argued against yourself in saying that humanity can never reach an objective morality, meaning it does not exist.
When did I say that?
Hmmm, "We cannot achieve perfect objectivity in our moral systems."
Because "humans are not perfectly logical creatures."
I already addressed this too, objective morality is the foundation for our moral systems
There is no objective morality.
Nothing that proves it is.
There is only your opinion.
I have given standards to validate it
You dodged all my questions on the subjects of what is more right, and how it righteousness is dictated.
When did I dodge them? What were they?
What are natural rights?
And "evolutionary psychology" is just genetic memory.
So genetics are partly to determine what is moral?
To what extent?
And if that is so, not all humans are genetically identical, with so much variation, how is that a proper determinant?
Natural rights is the philosophical concept of the state of nature for an individual to be truly free from outside compulsion and force.
Then it's an opinion.
A concept.
Genral relgion based on race, muslims have no parted morals, there is not straight guideline 'rules' to morals
religion*
general*
Natural rights are a concept. That isn't the basis for morality though, it is a standard to check it too.
Then what *is* the objective morality?
Where does it exist?
How does it exist?