Abstract

This paper aims at shedding light on the debate about Evolutionary Debunking Arguments and moral objectivity. I will assess the consequences of the evolutionary explanation of morality for moral objectivity, focusing on a recent realist argument which stems from the distinction between proximate and ultimate causes in biology. This argument presents some fallacies and thus fails in securing the realist conception of moral objectivity. I will argue that rethinking biological causation in terms of reciprocal causation rather than unidirectional causation, as the proximate/ultimate distinction presupposes, seems to push us toward a constructivist approach through the notion of niche construction.