There is a world of objective moral facts that some people can gain/have access to

Is this just a general idea that has emerged in moral philosophy or are there particular philosophers who have supported this view?

It's in reference to the Argument from Relativity. I'm using this general idea as an example of an alternative explanation for disagreement between cultures.

Thanks for any help! Google is failing me.

The idea that there are objective moral facts isn't very vogue right now. You might want to look into deontological philosophers.

What makes you say that? I would have said some form of realism is probably the single most popular metaethical view at the moment.

I say it because the commentary I've seen has been largely against the notion of moral objectivity. Both in the media and in places such as TSR, the dominant view seems to be in favour of or sympathetic to a relativistic and subjective conception of morality.

In the academic world maybe this is different (I sure hope that it is). I haven't had much contact with contemporary academic philosophy except with what makes it through the media, so would defer to yours and others' experience in that area.

Ah, I see. I think students (including many of those who go on to become realist moral philosophers) almost invariably start out as subjectivists and in many cases even relativists. Academic philosophy tended to centre around non-realist views for much of the 20th century (although relativism has always been extremely rare), but realism has come back strongly over the last 20 years or so.

Does A-level require you to supplement your arguments with some kind of appeal to authority? I hope not. David Enoch is probably the most prominent advocate of moral realism at the moment:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Taking-Morality-Seriously-Defense-Realism/dp/0199683174/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417423428&sr=8-1&keywords=enoch+taking+morality+seriously

"moral fact" is a dubious concept. facts are non-negotiable and given; morality is invented. carbon has 4 hydrogen bonds. fact.
sex with donkeys is wrong. not fact.

"Morality is invented" is where you show you don't understand the concept of objective morality, which you must at least entertain as an idea that exists to enter discussion on ethical realism.

I'm a philosophy undergraduate. No requirement of the sort, was just asking a simple question. If the answer is no, the answer is no.

No need to get funny or critical about my work.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply anything critical about your work at all.

I did assume you were an A-level student, just because the majority of posters seem to be, but I was asking a genuine question about A-levels. In my opinion it ought to be possible to write an A* philosophy A-level answer without mentioning any particular philosophers, and I was just concerned that the curriculum might be such as to require students to back up their own arguments with references to individual thinkers. I just genuinely hope that that is not the case!

As to your own question then, there are plenty of contemporary philosophers you might want to read. Besides David Enoch, Mark Schroeder is someone worth looking at - there's an exchange of views between them at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30sX0K2vJPA. A good collection is Geoffrey Sayre-McCord's Essays in Moral Realism, and another recent defence is Russ Shafer-Landau, Moral Realism.

i do entertain it as an idea. a wrong one.

Fair enough, I didn't get an A* at A level but I did get an A with using minimal/no philosophers in the majority of my essays.
I'll look into those when I re-write my notes for the Jan exam, thank you For now, the essay is handed in so we'll see how well I presented the point in a couple weeks.



Fair enough, but no offence it's irrelevant to my question hence I really don't care what your opinion is.

no offence taken; you are obviously not able to cope with my point of view, so i will leave this thread.

Generally, I agree with you. I'm saying you're being awkward by pushing your opinions in where it's completely irrelevant and unwanted.

"moral fact" is a dubious concept. facts are non-negotiable and given; morality is invented. carbon has 4 hydrogen bonds. fact.
sex with donkeys is wrong. not fact.

What do you mean by invented?