But that caring did not always exist and was "learned", etc...
You have felt love for others, have you not? I instinctively loved my brothers and nobody taught me. If someone attacked my brother or my friend, look out! There are ties that form because we enter the world absolutely dependent upon the love of others. I say that's true and an objective approach, even though it can only be stated from my subjective point of view.
In such a circumstance, the fear of others not being my brother is something we would learn. So, the impetus of morality is innate. Consider that in neuro-chemistry, the body is made to create chemicals that form what we perceive as both compassion and fear. We grieve and cry at the loss of others. We don't learn that. We were made and fashioned to experience it. Show me some hatred and I'll bet it came from a betrayal of some form (barring wordplay). I think a child starts out innocent and learns immorality. In other words, we start out trusting, and learn to distrust.
Humans used to be very much like rabid, wild animals, etc...
Caring about nothing and no one but themselves and their own immediate needs, etc...
And that quite literally and in a very extreme way, etc...
That's a theory and it's subjective in that it remains to be proven. I've read theories like that, some relying on city/states forming or dominant powers vs inferior powers. But I think this is talking about rules to govern, and who rules, makes the rules. Do we have rules that are immoral? Black people sit at the back of the bus? We've waged campaigns of genocide based on so called moralities such as Native Americans don't know god, so they're savages.
We certainly have carnal impulses, but what keeps them at bay? This is what self-control implies. Self-control is therefore seen objectively as a moral virtue, even though the impulses they control are also innate in the person (See spiritual mind vs carnal mind). This creates semantical confusion since the same terms mean different things according to which mind is being served.
I've read about Scientific studies which purport to show that even rats show compassion. I've seen experiments where baby monkeys through adolescence were allowed time with their mothers ranging from 100%, 50%, 0%. The monkeys that were 100% of the time with their mothers through adolescence, turned out friendly trusting and happy. The ones who were raised 50% of the time with their Mothers were distrustful of others. The ones that were 0%, were insane with fear, and they were vicious. I'm no authority on the matter, I only know that the goodness in mankind is universal and it's corruptible.
It's the way I see objective, etc...
I know. I can see that too. You're not wrong. But what is a fact or is it in fact a fact? The terminology for morality/immorality is positive/negative. This is for the sake of contrast. Therefore morality is proven through its negative in our reality.
And morality is a part of reality, is it not...?
Oh yeah. But for the sake of clarity, it matters what a person means when they say the word. Is it a subject matter of morality/immorality? Or is it Love/compassion, the actual morality? We teach our children right/wrong because we love them and want them to be good people for the sake of having productive lives.
If we're talking about rules, I think we'll find that immorality is the impetus for rules, which would make the negative an impetus for morality, if the rules are deemed the morality. This is antithetical to the term morality as a positive. This is how semantics form in subjective views. Immorality did not write the rules for morality. Morality wrote the rules because of immorality. So, accordingly, what came first in mankind, in regards to what is moral behavior, would be objectively perceived as ignorance of morality/immorality, since knowledge implies that there is a Truth that exists apart from ourselves, and this knowledge is about who we are.
Or at least came about among humans in a human existence as reality over time and with enough human advancement, right...?
Did humans advance morality, or did morality advance humans? What if we exist in a temporal setting, to learn the value of Who God is by being made in His Image? Because as a creature, we only become vain when we take God for granted.
