[erdeszt]

Even if I'd have a moral framework to start a discussion upon I wouldn't be able to convince you to stop eating meat because it was not a choice you made based on facts and rational arguments but something you've born into. Unless you find the moral values yourself you'll be eating meat forever.

[threatofrain]

That's exactly my thinking about moral and ethical argumentation. If we already share the same values, lucky for us, we have a foundation to build upon. If not, oh well, let's look for areas we can agree upon.

I think moral consensus is successfully used when the right historical moment has come along, and the tipping point has come to the old moral majority. Obama has made a similar point in his recent arguments about gun policy, stating that for some issues, there just isn't the moral consensus to do pragmatic work.

The likelihood is that one cannot build a bridge across values, and that values are axiomatic. Either you accept them or you don't. But if you built a blockbuster theory that built consensus in the philosophical community, those effects would probably begin to ripple outward. I think that's incredible work.