Absolute Morals and evolution

[jthegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
But, for the common usage of the term "subjective" (even in the fields of ethics and philosophy)

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this statement but it's pretty much beside the point because:

[ QUOTE ]
I will conclude that the word "subjective", according to your definition, is mostly meaningless in this context. I will concede that morality is not "subjective" according to your definition (or Rand's definition, by the way).


[/ QUOTE ]

It makes no difference to me the specific action or decision a person makes. All that really matters is the value/principle they are acting on. And those values/principles are more than just a matter of opinion. They're based on our nature as human beings and can be discovered and developed logically.

[ QUOTE ]
It makes no difference to me the specific action or decision a person makes. All that really matters is the value/principle they are acting on. And those values/principles are more than just a matter of opinion. They're based on our nature as human beings and can be discovered and developed logically.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, "helping others is good", and "insulting people is bad" -- those are the two general principles you've mentioned. I don't think those are just a matter of opinion, either. But, they are subjective. What "helps" one person, may not be "helping" someone else. And an insult to you, may be a compliment to me. So, those objective principles, in practice, are measured subjectively. But, both of those (and probably any other you could come up with) would fall under my single principle of morality: "increase happiness". And, in my definition, happiness is at least partly subjective.