SUMMARY
If morality is objective, its existence is fundamentally more important than our knowledge of it. Objective morality, as a universal and factual truth, holds independently of whether anyone recognizes or understands it. Knowing that morality is objective aligns us with this truth, but such knowledge depends on morality’s prior existence. However, this raises a challenging tension: morality is inherently about guiding human behavior toward fairness and goodness, which implies that awareness and understanding of moral truths are crucial for morality to have meaningful impact.
While it is more important to know that objective morality exists than to know every specific moral rule, humanity ultimately requires the concrete content of morality to navigate practical ethical decisions. Objective morality’s existence lays the foundation, but without clarity on its specific principles, its guidance remains incomplete. Thus, the relationship between morality’s objective existence and our knowledge of what is moral is intertwined—existence is primary, but meaningful knowledge of morality’s content is essential for morality to fulfill its purpose in human life.
THE ARGUMENT
If morality is objective, how does it relate to knowing what is moral?
Key Definitions
God:
A supreme being traditionally believed to be all-knowing (omniscient), all-powerful (omnipotent), perfectly good (omnibenevolent), and the creator or sustainer of the universe. In many moral frameworks, God is also considered the source or foundation of objective morality.
Belief:
A mental attitude that something is true or right, even if it cannot be fully proven. Belief involves confidence but not certainty.
Knowledge:
A justified true belief. To know something is to be reasonably certain that it is true and to have reasons or evidence that support it.
Objective Morality:
The idea that certain moral principles are universally and factually true, independent of personal opinions, cultures, or beliefs.
Subjective Morality:
The view that moral judgments are based on personal or cultural perspectives and are not universally binding or factually true.
Is objective morality's existence more important than knowing it exists?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
"It is more important for objective morality to exist than to know it. Objective morality existing matters more than knowing it exists. Knowing morality is objective cannot matter most.
Why?
Objective morality will still exist if nobody knows of it or cares. So it is what matters. Knowing is only good because it means you are in tune with the truth.
So the truth has to matter before knowing can matter.
Therefore, morality's existence matters most. Knowing it exists is impossible if it does not exist. Thus, its existing matters more than knowing.
Can morality being true matter as much as knowing it is? No! To ask the question can show that one is—at least a little skeptical—about objective morality."
PROBLEM:
The argument is right that morality being objective matters more than anybody knowing it. But there is an unanswerable issue.
Morality is about what we need to do to be good and fair. If there is a choice between its existence and people being aware we are meant to choose the former. That makes no sense and contradicts what morality is supposed to be about. It makes morality meaningless.
That is morality by definition explored. Its content with regard to principles or specific moral guidelines needs to be the next topic.
Another question.
Is it knowing that morality is real that matters, and not knowing exactly what is to be classed as moral or immoral? Is knowing it is real—even if you don't know the specifics—the most important?
Yes—it is more important to know that justice is real than how to implement it. The principle is not about how you apply it. For example, both vengeful people and softies believe in justice but disagree on how to serve it.
You can know objective morality exists even if you don't know the content. For example, you may sense that it is wrong to hurt others for fun, but that does not mean you think it is wrong to rob banks. You might not see how bad it is to rob banks.
Strangely, humanity needs the specifics more than anything else! Objective morality does not deliver them as being of first importance!
APPENDIX: GOD AS KNOWER OF MORALITY
Does God really know the facts about what is right and wrong?
God is supposed to know all things. This is impossible. Apart from the fact that I exist now, I know nothing. Everything I say I know, I really mean I believe. It must be the same with God. It is impossible to know anything for sure apart from one's own existence. Thus, God is a contradictory idea. A God that has beliefs is not a God at all. Even if those beliefs are right, God cannot know this, for he only believes it. God is not entitled to ask anybody to agree with his beliefs about right and wrong. How much less can he be entitled to command? Such a God should be defied.
Does he give us such knowledge?
They say if a person knows what is right or wrong, it is because God put that knowledge into them. If we are the products of chance, it seems mad to say that our values are real. But the fact is, whatever about their reality, nothing is served by suppressing our sense of values. That we follow them without being able to prove their validity shows that we are our own gods. God cannot be our God, even if he exists.
Not everybody knows if objective morality exists. A very young person might not know. A brainwashed person wouldn't know. Would an all-good God who is all about objective morality equip one person to know and another not to? Certainly not!
If God grounds morality, he does not necessarily ground any moral code's content. You have to work that out. In fact, stressing him or making him important would be an evil.