The necessary/sufficient condition distinction only defuses the counterexamples if internalism can specify which desires ground reasons without appealing to external normative facts.

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

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Ground (as a verb, 'to ground')(in philosophy): To be the fundamental reason or basis for something. If your desire for pizza grounds your reason to go to the restaurant, that desire is why you have that reason.
Internalism(Moral psychology; used to characterize the relationship between moral judgment and motivation): The view that it is a logical or conceptual truth that some degree of motivation is internal to a moral judgment itself — that making a genuine moral claim entails being motivated to some degree.
counterexample([IHT] arg. 2): A possible obligational situation (casus possibilis positus) that verifies the antecedent and falsifies the consequent of an inference
necessary condition(Counterfactual analysis of causation; Mackie 1965, 1974): A condition C is necessary for event E if E would not have occurred in the absence of C
normative facts(The target of epistemological challenges from anti-realists): Facts of a specifically normative kind, distinguished from descriptive or natural facts, whose mind-independence is in question
sufficient condition(Used in the context of whether intrinsic properties can define species membership): A property whose presence guarantees membership in or applicability of a category, such that having the property entails belonging to the species or class

2 topics