ABSTRACT
This last chapter explains the main question left is which of them to pick. The first is that there is no question of context; the second is that ethics should be like science; the third is that moral theory can capture everything. It is also part of the explanation of the third mistake: it is because ethics is so messy that no moral theory can capture everything. Others begin to appear when we note the intimate connections that an adequate ethical outlook will inevitably have with motivation and deliberation on the one hand, and explanation and prediction on the other. Those moral theorists who admit that moral theory cannot plausibly be directly involved in motivation and deliberation see its main role, instead, in explaining why it is good for agents to be motivated, and to deliberate, in whatever way it is that their theory recommends. The trouble is completely general, and it begins with the inevitably.
