It seems this course is focusing on the more 'classical' works. I do find some purchase with more modern philosophers such as Rand but even they fail to 'epitomize' how I see things. Which is to be expected. I find it a ridiculous notion to think that any two people would so completely share a philosophical view on life as to not find disagreements in that philosophy. It is my opinion that, in my opinion, like morals, ethics, 'rights' and principles, philosophy is little more than a manmade concept turned social construct that is nearly, if not entirely, dependent on perspective and is thusly fluid and not to be completely shared with any other person.
We each have our own perspectives, uniquely tweaked here and there by our past, memories, thoughts, ruminations, culture and everything else that makes the us in the present, us.
Therefore I don't expect to 'find' a philosophy I fit into. Rather, I expect to learn all I can about what has been thought and said on the subjects and make my own conclusions and forge my own paths forward from what is already available.
In that sense, I think I am very amiable to the basic premise of Kant in that I don't simply accept things as they are presented, I base my perspectives on what I think about what is presented in addition to all else that I have knowledge about. I may be open to what others think and say but I will run it all through the filter of my own perception and allow myself to dissolve it through reasoned and logical thought until I produce whatever 'substance' may result.
Often I find myself at odds with most others, often I find myself between those at odds. Rarely do I find myself unequivocally standing shoulder to shoulder with anyone.
RE: Morality: Only Subjective Or Objective?