Why is the philosophy of man the foundation of moral philosophy?

Answer 1

Because men have a tendency to impose their will on others, and part of their will includes a desire to control female sexuality. But I suspect that by the term 'men' you really mean 'human' so a brief answer would be: you cannot have a philosophy of "right and wrong" (moral philosophy) unless you already have a metaphysical belief in the existence of right and wrong as "natural kinds" of some sort. Daoism, for example, does not have a moral philosophy because Daoists do not believe that anything (including the categories of right/wrong, good/evil, etc.) is rooted in absolutes. For Daoists, you are either "going with the flow" of the Dao, or you are interfering with the spontaneous flow of nature in some way. Thus they have no "moral philosophy" as such. They are not even "moral relativists" because moral relativists need some absolutes for morals to be relative to. For most moral relativists, a person or a culture exists as a being or thing that endures over time and has some intrinsic nature. For them, right and wrong are relative to this intrinsic nature. Thus they have an ontological commitment to the reality of things having intrinsic natures. The Daoists don't have this sort of ontological commitment, so they are not even moral relativists. They simply believe in the unique, unrepeatable process of each spontaneously-arising moment of existence.

So the bottom line is that moral philosophy depends on an ontology that accepts the notion of things having intrinsic natures of some sort. Moral absolutists believe that "the whole of Being" has some intrinsic nature, so that there is absolute right or wrong based on the intrinsic nature of the whole. Moral relativists don't believe that the whole of reality has its own intrinsic nature, but they do believe that each thing in reality has its own intrinsic nature, and thus there are still "relatively absolute" categories of right and wrong for each being. If you reject any ontological commitment to intrinsic natures of any sort, then you have no basis for a moral philosophy at all.