objective moral standards?

Tweet

There are people who believe that right and wrong exist independently of human subjectivity. i am not one of those people. nothing is inherently right or wrong. these qualifiers do not exist out there, in the world. if i kick you in the knee, and it causes pain, my action is not 'wrong'. it merely is. you might not like it since plain is not pleasurable, but that's your problem. of course, the standard alternative living place for moral standards - human subjectivity - is just as problematic. if moral values existed wholly independently of the external world, they would necessarily be arbitrary. they would have no bearing on things like pain or death or displeasure. instead, moral values, like most qualifiers that we speak of on a daily basis, subsist in an uneasy space between subject and object. ethical values - just like properties of colour, hardness, size, weight, and so forth - are neither objective nor subjective. instead, we may call them experiential. 'good' and 'bad', just like 'blue', 'heavy', or 'tiny', are not immutable properties of objects. they can only be arrived at through a dialectical interaction between us and the world. any thoughts on the subject?