That's unethical

Step aside, brainlets.

Guilty pleasure desu. His opinions are shit though.

Relativism is an 'objective' morality. When people say "that's immoral" they don't pronounce the asterisk at the end

>Relativism is an 'objective' morality
No it's not. This pseudo deep "non-x is a form of x" needs to fucking stop.
It's literally a dildo for fence sitters.

Yes it is, in the way OP meant it since we've never actually had an objective morality on account of its impossibility. I say 'objective' because it's a well-established framework within which all other 'relativistic' moralities function, but still interferes when it senses that one such relativism is a threat to itself. That's as 'objective' as any other 'objective' morality of the past, in that it is based on historical development and reason.

Simple. You accept that there is an objective ethical-morality. You accept that there is such a thing as the objective truth, which includes the subjective.

Objective and universal aren't synonyms.
The discussion about objective morality has zero to do with how much accepted these morals are or are not.

Relativism is not a morality. I bet you everything there are several relativists with vastly different moralities itt RIGHT NOW. You can't just switch the meaning of words in a debate and then say everybody else is wrong

People think objective morality means independent of subjects, but that's wrong. Objective morality means "as agreed upon by subjects".
So in practice law is objective morality.

watch Shelly Kagan's bits. Only person I've ever seen who made WLC look like a retard
youtube.com/watch?v=SiJnCQuPiuo

>People think it means what it says but actually it means the opposite
Law isn't any form of morality objective or subjective. It is in parts based on morality but it's not morality nor does it claim to be one.