A New Case for Moral Skepticism: The Argument from Paradox

Abstract

It is nearly half a century since moral philosophers first began to grapple with a series of troubling axiological paradoxes. It now looks as though they may resist satisfactory resolution. Concern is growing that this supports skepticism. I provide the first full articulation and defense of this concern in the form of a case for global axiological skepticism and a tentative roadmap for extension to a broader moral skepticism. The result is an alternative to the disagreement- and debunking-based arguments that predominate in contemporary metaethics.