>>1007196>Best>Objective>How can anyone be this dim?You're saying that, given time, we'll understand, objectively, the optimal (best) preferences of mankind.
Okay.. But it's going to be subjective. It's always going to be subjective. You're going to have to have some sort of justification for the "Objective" standard. And if that justification is subjective, then you're going to have to find out how the justification is measured.
Let's suppose, for example, that you have a lawful society. If you banned alcohol, most people might be alright with that, because that's an objective choice made with objective evidence and an objective justification (your assumption). After a while, without drunk driving and overdoses, people are going to lose a moral reason to be against alcohol; it's just going to be a thing that people used to do. They lose justification for alcohol prohibition. Ending the alcohol prohibition is put back on the table once more.
That example goes to show that you could say "White women are objectively more beautiful"; but then when we let it become too standardized, our justification might change. Humans are like that.
There is no "More aesthetic" human just as there is no "More aesthetic" animal, because the justification will always change.
