Abstract

Ethical naturalists, who reject strong reductivist positions, hold a plausible theory that is a version of realism. In the thesis I provide a critical response to the skeptical attacks levied against these ethical naturalists. In particular, I examine the criticisms that J. L. Mackie and Simon Blackburn have put forward concerning the ethical naturalist's treatment of the concept of supervenience. I argue that the naturalist's position on supervenience can be defended against these criticisms