|Are morals internal (psychological) or external (metaphysical)|
If they internal they must arise out of the socio/politico/economic environment we live in. if so, we are passive pawns for we cannot live outside our time and culture, every 'man' is a victim of his/her time.
As to the possible grounding of morality, questions include: how are moral judgments related to psychological motivation? when, if at all, do they constitute knowledge? if we wish to be uber epistemological we find that compassion is clearly evident
in the animal kingdom (Elephants grieving Dolphins emitting warnings etc). Therefore to be humane you do not have to be human.
If they are external (metaphysical) swirling out there in the ether, ie Kant's categorical imperative, then we are equally passive for they are 'given'. I mean are there ethical external facts (e.g. facts about what we morally ought to do), independent of mental attitudes and social norms? Clearly there are not 'facts' in this case.
If the status of ethics is not grounded in facts external to human psychology, how might we best understand ethical truth claims?
If we takes moral talk and thought at face value, we might contend that all moral judgments are,by their nature are not facts but theories/opinions and in that if facts are a yardstick, morals are false and no more than theories or opinions.