Abstract

Ethical Constructivism presents itself as an alternative to moral realism and moral antirealism. It claims for the objectivity of morals but does not claim for the existence of external moral facts. Ethical constructivism has to face two questions though, concerning its logical status (is it a genuine meta-ethics or is it a substantive moral theory?) and Euthyphro's dilemma. I will claim that it can answer neither of such questions. Its logical status is different from that of moral realism and moral antirealism: accordingly, it cannot be an alternative metaethics. Moreover, it cannot solve Euthyphro's dilemma, so that constructivists are forced to choose: either there are moral facts or there are not; but the option of building them is not conceptually available.