In lecture, we talked about Objectivism versus Relativism, and how an Objectivist would view morality differently from a Relativist. A moral standard is object is it holds universally, that is, it does not change depending on opinion or beliefs. What make something objective then? Who defines what is objective and what is not?
From deep thinking on this matter, I believe nothing is ever originally objective. Take the color red, for example. An individual discovered that colors have certain properties and could be used as identifiers for our environment, and therefore assigned a name to certain wavelengths of light. This individual then shared their knowledge with the people around them and as this idea of the color red spread, more people began to accept it. Ultimately, everyone accepted this idea and it turned into a universal fact. This can be compared to morals. If killing the innocent seems immoral to you, I and most rational beings, then it can be considered as a universal fact. What started out as a personal opinion turns into an objective truth. Of course, there will be certain individuals who disagree with this truth, as is true with the various killings we have seen throughout history and today. Kant’s concept supports this as these individuals would not be considered as rational beings anymore.