ABSTRACT
The arguments against intuitionism in ethics are well-known, and the matter might be thought closed. Yet philosophical doctrines sometimes take a very long time to die even when they are formally pronounced extinct; indeed it has been truly remarked by some that this obstinacy is a very important fact about their peculiar character. If they could more easily be put to sleep, that would be because they were not expressions of philosophical perplexity and insight, but, for instance, scientific hypotheses. In this essay I want briefly to review some of the traditional arguments for intuitionism in some of its different forms, and then to indicate the arguments which have been offered against them; from there I shall pass to what I am really concerned to do, namely, to discuss the controversy between the intuitionists and their critics. I say controversy in the singular; but it will appear that as a matter of fact there are several issues at stake, even though, in my view, one of these is central.
