I'd like to present a rough sketch of my views on morality. I haven't thought too deep on the matter but I'd like your views.

As of now I'm still not aware of the assumptions I'm making and whether they're reasonable or not.

I know of two moral theories viz. Deontology and Consequentialism.

The former is ''do only those things that can be universalized''.

The latter is ''try to make everybody happy''.

I've underlined the words relevant to my idea of what morality should be.

When we say ''universalized'' and ''everybody'' a (the!?) foundation of equality is being laid down. What I mean is to make something universal, e.g. the law, what we are doing is making everyone equal. When we say everyone's happiness is important, we're, again, calling for equality. This, equality, is a key requirement for both theories; perhaps a requirement for ALL moral theoies.

What does equality depend on? Equality, to me, depends on similarity. When two things are similar, they're equal. Differences,therefore, translate to inequality.

Therefore, can morality be based on similarity, as opposed to difference?

All the evil and suffering in the world are based on difference. Slavery, genocide, racism, war, murder, rape, animal cruelty, etc. are, all, based on differences.

All the good in the world is based on similarity. Slaves are people like us. Muslims are people like us. Our enemies have families that love them like us and so on.

So, in a very simple sense, moral theory can be based on similarity. Science supports such a theory because the Tree of Life shows we all have a common ancestor(s). Perhaps such a view only matters in deciding who/what has moral value but there is a visible trend: slaves emancipated->women's right->animal rights->environment conservation. Similarity is the basis of ALL moral theories.

So, can't we, in a very simple sense, say ''good if and only if similar''?

There can be NO hierarchy in morality because the former depends on difference and the latter is all about similarity.