*Section II is titled as:Arguably the most prominent defender of moral sense theory in the history of philosophy is David Hume (1711–1776).
While he discusses morality in Book 3 [Part 1 Section 1&2*] of his Treatise of Human Nature (1739–40),
Hume's most mature, positive account of the moral sense is found in An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_sen ... ry#History
Moral Distinctions Deriv’d From a Moral Sense.
The Principles of Moral Sense Theory:Moral sense theory (also known as moral sentimentalism) is a theory in moral epistemology and meta-ethics concerning the discovery of moral truths.
Moral sense theory typically holds that distinctions between morality and immorality are discovered by emotional responses to experience.
Some take it to be primarily a view about the nature of moral facts or moral beliefs (a primarily metaphysical view)—this form of the view more often goes by the name "sentimentalism".
Others take the view to be primarily about the nature of justifying moral beliefs (a primarily epistemological view)—this form of the view more often goes by the name "moral sense theory".
However, some theorists take the view to be one which claims that both moral facts and how one comes to be justified in believing them are necessarily bound up with human emotions.
My point:The moral sense is often described as providing information in a way analogous to other sensory modalities, such as sight in the perception of colors. It is contrasted with the way in which one acquires a priori, non-empirical knowledge, such as mathematical knowledge for example.
One way to understand the moral sense is to draw an analogy between it and other kinds of senses.
Beauty is something we see in some faces, artworks and landscapes. We can also hear it in some pieces of music. We clearly do not need an independent aesthetic sense faculty to perceive beauty in the world. Our ordinary five senses are quite enough to observe it, though merely observing something beautiful is not by itself enough to appreciate its beauty. Suppose we give a name to this ability to appreciate the beauty in things we see: let's call it the aesthetic sense.
This aesthetic sense does not come automatically to all people with perfect vision and hearing, so it is fair to describe it as something extra, something not wholly reducible to vision and hearing.
As the aesthetic sense informs us about what is beautiful, we can analogically understand the moral sense as informing us of what is good.
People with a functioning moral sense get a clear impression of wrongness when they see (or perhaps even imagine) someone being mugged, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_sen ... y#Overview
While the Moral Sense Theorists e.g. Hume reject any 'ought' from 'is',
they nevertheless recognize justified moral facts do exist, as such the related morality is objective.
Thus the answer and counter to:
PH: What could make morality objective?