Meta-Metaethical Realism

Could Anti-Realism be Objectively True?

The EA Forum is currently hosting a fun debate (courtesy of

Bentham's Bulldog

) over whether morality is objective. Many of the anti-realists seem to find it mysterious how there could be a fact of the matter as to which fundamental normative standards are correct. Further, since our moral beliefs and behavior can be explained without positing moral facts, many consider such facts to be an unmotivated theoretical posit. (I think there’s more for philosophy to explain than just third-personal empirical data, but never mind that for now.) What I find interesting is that these would also seem reasons to doubt that there are objective answers to any philosophical questions, including the metaethical question under dispute.