Do Morals, like the Moon, NOT exist when we aren't looking at them?

[Iwannaplato]

And when we are looking at morals, what do we see?
This all may seem facetious, but I want to make sure I am looking at morals, and the right morals, so they exist.
Like I don't want to look at the might makes right morals - though I am not sure which way to look so I avoid looking at those - I want to look at the morals that are more empathy- and collaboration-based.
Otherwise a situation may arise where no one is looking at the nice morals, and people get violent and mean, before anyone else can look at the nice morals so they exist and are followed.
And if there are any relevant double slit experiments, please link me.

I'm an ontological anti-realist BUT a moral realist.

It's dumb and old fashioned and, like common sensey, to think things are real.
But morals...that's where to be a realist these days.

Morals are realer than the Moon!
Go Goodness!

[Agent Smith]

This question many will find interesting because it's like a signpost on a road junction. What would be most helpful and enlightening is if someone could tell us in a few ADHD-friendly words what's written on it! Please let it not be in Chinese! Please let it not be in Chinese! Please ... please!!! Who knows this could be the beginning of a monumental discovery in <insert what strikes your mind first>.

"I can see it!"

"What? What can you see?"

"The red ..."

"The red bus? The red balloon? What? What?"

"The red ... reddish ... bug ... buggish ..."

"A reddish buggish?! Are you ok?!"

"No, I'm obviously not ok! I'm blind you idiot!"

[Iwannaplato]

"What? What can you see?"

There's the rub. What can you see when you look at morals. They exist. They are objective. So, when you look at them, what do you see?
Perhaps a list of heuristics, so we know where to look, and then what we will see so we can keep looking at them.

You cut to the center.

[Agent Smith]

"What? What can you see?"

There's the rub. What can you see when you look at morals. They exist. They are objective. So, when you look at them, what do you see?
Perhaps a list of heuristics, so we know where to look, and then what we will see so we can keep looking at them.

You cut to the center.

Morality goes against the grain of the philosophical wood, or does it?

[Iwannaplato]

Morality goes against the grain of the philosophical wood, or does it?

Because brains exist, morality exists. Unfortunately the only living brains being looked at are being looked at by brain surgeons and their teams.

Sure, you have other medical teams looking at CAT scans and MRIs and PET scans, but this is mediated looking at. And hard as one might try, one cannot look at the morality portion of the brain in those images.

Nor can one see it, unfortunately, on the surface of the brain, nor sadly when incisions are made, for example to get at tumors.

To look at morality...well, that's the whole point of this thread.

I look at behavior. I look at photos of the brain.

But without VAs help, I cannot go beyond the appearances of morality to the ding an sich of morality itself.

To be fulfilled a moral realist one, I assume, is as surprised and relieved as the first white guy beaching a royal commisioned sailing ship on what later will be called the Americas.

The hothouse glory of the moral fauna of the New World, not merely posited but looked at in its overwhelming grace.

[Agent Smith]

Interesting! I see a, one pen, a box with the caption Signature, a partly cloudy weather announcement scrolling sideways on a screen, a cute little cartoon of a smiling sun peeping from behind white coulds.