Like many here, I find it hard to make sense of our strongest moral convictions, especially about things like torture or slavery, without concluding that some moral facts are objective.
To whom does “our” refer? Most people throughout history do not seem to have shared these intuitions. If “people intuit things as being good/right or bad/wrong” is evidence for their moral truth/falsity, then it seems clear that the positions with the most evidence supporting them are “it is wrong to torture or enslave the ingroup and right to torture and enslave the outgroup”
Can we say “this is wrong” in any meaningful way if morality is only expressive or constructed?
Yes, in the same way that we can make meaningful statements about the quality of art: either by expressing subjective opinions or by defining terms and discussing it in terms of those.
To whom does “our” refer? Most people throughout history do not seem to have shared these intuitions. If “people intuit things as being good/right or bad/wrong” is evidence for their moral truth/falsity, then it seems clear that the positions with the most evidence supporting them are “it is wrong to torture or enslave the ingroup and right to torture and enslave the outgroup”
Yes, in the same way that we can make meaningful statements about the quality of art: either by expressing subjective opinions or by defining terms and discussing it in terms of those.