ABSTRACT
Some philosophers seek to debunk morality, arguing that second-order evidence shows that we have no reliable capacity for identifying moral facts, if such facts exist. Higher-order evidence about the field of philosophy, however, suggests that reasoning in this field is unreliable; that the field has a particular bias toward skepticism of various kinds, including especially moral skepticism; and that the sorts of arguments moral skeptics rely on are especially unreliable. These considerations serve to debunk moral skepticism.
