This thread is dedicated to show how morality is absent or illusory all throughout history by showing a history of war and slavery from ancient times to the present.
Clearly from this we can see the subjectivity of morality by just reading history alone forever proving its absence from all reality and by showing the deception of its usage.
Are you saying that because man hasn’t acted in a moral manner all throughout history that objective morality doesn’t exist?
Yes.
Some researchers at Harvard found some interesting similarities in moral issue, regardless of socio-economical/cultural background. This supports a notion of innate culture, which was underpinned by cat-scanning when individuals made moral choices.
Other than that, could you elaborate on why war is a proof of lacking morality?
Should the moral code always dominate economic interests to be considered moral? If so I’ll agree on your conclusion, but not on this premise.
Like liars and thieves whole civilized nations prescribe themselves to be moral all the while they kill or destroy millions of people’s lives.
Hypocrisy of social history reveals morality to be nothing but a deception utilized by those who have weapons to endorse it.
Man is naturally predatory not naturally moral and should a man tell you that men are naturally moral where you believe him you are likely to already fell victim to the whole charade with laughter in the background.
Well folks I plan to name all the wars until the first A.D. and then I am going to retire this evening.
I’ll finish naming all the wars later on. Please ask questions and keep this thread alive while I am gone.
This isn’t a classical survey questionnaire sample. No self-description, but a wide range of different choices. The way people handle those choices shows significant bias in all people towards a certain moral perspective.
Well if you remember what I was saying earlier I plan to show the history of slavery besides war in these examples I am posting.
( Be patient with me in posting all this material.)
In times of peace or war slavery is forever permitted by moral priests, politicians, and pirates alike. 
So again we see the natural predatory motives of men without morality. Morality only exists to subdue the conquered or for those breeded to become future slaves.
It is a highly complex manipulating deception created to enslave people and to fool the masses.
My arguement is that men are inherently predatory, violent and dangerous. It is a consequence of our biology, history and our success rate as a species.
The wolf cannot change what it simply is. The same goes for saying about people.
What is interesting about moralists on this final note is their condemnation of immoral acts within their own society but their unfletching support for national wars at the same time. Hypocrisy…I think so.
Think about it for a moment.
Yes, well that was also the point of Hobbes. However, thanks to Hume’s point, we’re blissed with the gift of consciousness, and as you yourself point out - the hypocrisy of priests etc works. So the wolf has changed with the stick of the guardian.
So if I were to kill you in cold blood would you say that because I killed you murder is not wrong? Or are you saying because of the amount of moral depravity in the world it is impossible for objective morality to exists?
I agree that morals are subjective; I don’t understand how a list of wars proves that.
This seems to presuppose that killing and destroying is immoral, and thus said societies who engage in killing and destroying are hypocritical when they consider themselves moral.
I assume then your argument is that there exists a gap between what people (societies) regard as moral behavior and how the actually behave towards others.
Would that be a fair assessment of your argument?
I ask because this is truly a staggering insight. That people can say one thing and act in a different manner… I wonder if this concept can be applied to current events in the Middle East as well. Someone should write a book about this, maybe even two!
Sometimes people need to see death and slaughter to understand that when simple conversation fails.
My arguement would be that the wolf has never stopped being the wolf and even though he may put on the sheep skin of guardianship he is still undoubtedly a wolf nonetheless.
Consciousness is overrated. There is nothing inherently special about man’s consciousness for such a perception is a relic idealism from old archaic days.
I guess this all makes sense, I mean, if you ignore the fact that people’s conceptions about morality drove probably all of those wars…
Of course morality drove those wars. 
This only proves that absolute morality doesn’t exist but instead it remains a subjective manipulation for violent proned people in their will to power.
My only frustration with morality is their mythology that their form of the will to power is the only right one. 
By the understanding of relativity there is endless forms and possibilities of the will to power.
There simply is no one “right” way.