Bill Bartlett writes:
> Martin William Smith wrote:
> >>From the Collins English dictionary:
> >
> >objective: 1. existing independently of perception or of an
> >individual's conceptions. 2. undistorted by emotion or personal
> >bias. 3. of or relating to actual and external phenomena as opposed to
> >thoughts, feelings, etc.
> >
> >consistent: 1.showing consistency; not self-contradictory. 2. in
> >agreement or harmony, accordant.
> >
> >I mean both.
>
> How can morality exist independent of a person't conceptions?

By being communicated from one person to another.  What exists in a
book?  If concepts couldn't exist independent of one individual, then
books could not contain concepts.

> Morality is pure thought, an abstract concept.

Suppose I am bombing Yugoslavia.  Milutin would protest on moral
grounds (he says).  He would demand that I stop bombing Yugoslavia
because bombing is immoral.  Milutin is an anarchist (he says), so he
would not expect me to stop based on authority.  He would expect me to
stop because he expects me to behave according to moral code he claims
I am violating.  If there is no objective morality here, then I as the
bomber can refuse his demand and continue to bomb because my moral
code says this bombing is moral.  Unless there is an objective
morality here, Milutin cannot base his protest on it.  He can be
inspired by a subjective morality, but if he expects me to submit to
his protest for moral reasons, it has to be objective.  He can't force
me to stop bombing, because he is an anarchist.

> You mean consistent.

I mean both.  Consistency is required for integrity.

martin