What are some philosophers that made a compelling case for objective

File: AFI+FEST+2013+Presented+Audi+Premiere+Secret+WtHO2rHdxITl.jpg (70KB, 400x594px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 400x594px

There are none, Sam. Go to sleep.

File: 97517_web.jpg (90KB, 1440x960px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1440x960px

>>9570832
damn you beat me to it

>>9570816
>objective secular morality
What are some mathematicians that made a compelling case for the existence of square circles?

>>9570816

A Short History of Ethics, Macintyre.

Doesn't make a case for it, but shows some examples and will get you on the right track.

>>9570816
A bunch, including Kant, Aristotle, Mill. Here are some recent overview books:

Enoch - Taking Morality Seriously: A Defense of Robust Realism
Korsgaard - The Sources of Normativity
Huemer - Ethical Intuitionism
Shafer-Landau - Moral Realism: A Defence

Here's the SEP article which should contain plenty of names and resources:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-realism/

>>9570832
>>9570864

A majority of professional philosophers are moral realists, or believe in an objective morality.

File: confucius-report-28-728.jpg (92KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 728x546px

>>9570816
confucius would seem to fit the bill

>>9570897
Doesn't Confucius more presume objective morals and then give advice on them? I didn't think he actually provided reasons for objective morality.

File: stefan_molyneux[1].jpg (36KB, 325x481px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 325x481px

Essential reading is Universal Preferable Behaviour by Stefan B. Molynuex

File: confucius_wenmiao-temple-58164bff3df78cc2e89a3265.jpg (521KB, 3276x2120px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 3276x2120px

>>9571253
In the Analects he doesn't, really, except in a kind of commonsensical way. But that's the core of his style and why he is persuasive. (It's also why people felt his advice couldn't be followed, hence Mozi, the Legalists, etc). Still tho.

>The Master said, Standing above others but without tolerance, carrying out rites but without reverence, conducting funeral proceedings but without grief—how can I bear to view such as these?

>Someone said of Yong, He is humane but lacking in eloquence. The Master said, Why does he need to be eloquent? People who overwhelm others with their glibness often end up hated by oth- ers. I don’t know if Yong is humane, but why does he need to be eloquent?

So yeah, no massive theoretical systems. That stuff is all in the Book of Rites and elsewhere, of course: and more ritual (surprise!) than abstraction and metaphysics.

Was way into Chinese philosophy last year, really interesting stuff.

>Oh look a secular moral system
>Ignore it and do whatever I want
>There are no consequences and it doesn't matter at all

Wow.