/lit/ - Literature

I am a philosophy pleb. So imagine my consternation when I hear about objective morality. NOTE: for the purposes of this thread we are assuming there is no god, or at least not a moralfag one (and if you want to get picky, if another omnipotent god with different views from the first god came into being, then the "objective" morality of the first god would become subjective, if indeed it was ever subjective at all since it's really just like, god's opinion, man. just because god is ultra powerful, how does that make his opinion any more "objectively correct" than a human's? is my boss's favorite ice cream objectively better than mine because he's more powerful than me?)

I just can't wrap my head around it. First of all, it seems to me that "morality" is a human construct, nobody knows or cares about morality but us (unless aliens, who may just further prove my point), and if we all disappeared, rules like "it is immoral to kill humans" would be cease to matter because there would be no humans, so how could "it is immoral humans" be objective if it no longer exists outside of a subjective conscience? 2+2 always equals 4, to everyone, and this is empirically demonstrable, even if all humans are dead (unless all humans dying somehow warps the fabric of reality and fucks up arithmetic, but I doubt it)

basically what I want to know is: are there any basic, easy to understand arguments for objective morality that aren't just a bunch of convoluted philosophy wanking, appeals to god's authority, etc?

/new/