OT: Objective moral truth

[deccan]

Jack Simth said:
The problem with objective morality (technically ethics - ethics are the rules and regs (or the way to come up with them to the nth degree) and morality is how well they are followed by a given individual - but that's nit-picking) is that we have yet to truly find a way around assumptions.

An excellent post on the problems with the foundational theory of epistemic justification, Jack Simth!

But your argument seems to apply to everything and so appears to deny that there is any objective truth to anything whatsoever, leaving the door open to things like Holocaust deniers, the Moon landings never occured theorists, Masonite conspirators who are so skilled at manipulating world events that the lack of evidence of a conspiracy and itself evidence of such a conspiracy etc.

I think that in order to maintain that objective truth is still possible (albeit in a weakened, post-Kantian form of the term), while still denying that "objective morality" is possible, requires more elaboration on the whole Hume / G.E. Moore thesis that it is impossible to derive an "ought" from an "is".