Joyce's argument proceeds from an evolutionary debunking structure that is methodologically neutral: it identifies a causal-historical gap between moral belief formation and any putative moral facts.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Causal-historical gap(the key problem Joyce identifies): A disconnect between how something actually came to exist (its cause and history) and what it claims to represent or describe; here, the gap between how evolution caused us to have moral beliefs and whether those beliefs match up with real moral facts.
Evolutionary debunking(metaethics): An argument that our moral beliefs are just the product of evolution (which helped our ancestors survive), not genuine discoveries of objective moral truths.
Joyce(as a philosopher referenced in metaethics): In this context, likely Richard Joyce, a contemporary philosopher who has written extensively defending error theory—the view that our moral judgments are systematically mistaken.
Methodologically neutral(describing how Joyce's argument avoids assuming a particular viewpoint): Conducted in a way that doesn't favor one side of a debate; the argument doesn't require you to already believe in or against moral truths.

Based on where you are in your exploration