Episode
#61 Why This Oxford Professor Thinks Morality is Objective - David Enoch
- Podcast
- The Uncertainty Podcast
- Published
- Dec 4, 2025
- Duration seconds
- 5104
- Processing state
not_requested
Actions
POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/the-uncertainty-podcast-7089022/episodes/61-why-this-oxford-professor-thinks-morality-is-objective-david-enoch/transcription-requests
Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/the-uncertainty-podcast-7089022/61-why-this-oxford-professor-thinks-morality-is-objective-david-enoch.md
Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.
Summary
Dr. David Enoch, author of "Taking Morality Seriously: A Defense of Robust Realism," joins me to discuss moral realism versus anti-realism, objections from the moral error theorist, and my personal sticking points in affirming the existence of irreducible moral facts: moral disagreement across cultures and evolutionary explanations for our moral beliefs. Buy David's book defending robust moral realism . To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee . Feel free to follow me Twitter . EPISODE CHAPTERS 00:00:00 Introduction 00:07:23 Naturalism vs. non-naturalism 00:19:23 Why should we reject moral error theory? 00:32:32 The revisionary costs of error theory 00:43:34 Intuition as our only ground for moral realism? 00:47:45 The connection to ethical intuitionism 00:51:19 Objection #1 - Moral disagreement 01:03:18 Moral skepticism 01:06:20 Objection #2 - Evolutionary debunking arguments 01:16:16 Is God required to explain objective morality? 01:20:45 Are most philosophers moral realists? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe