G. E. Moore's Intuitionism. A highly implausible meta-ethical position

The essay explores G. E. Moore's defense of the indefinability of goodness in "Principia Ethica," focusing on his open-question argument and the naturalistic fallacy. It critiques the implications of this view, addressing the problematic consequences of claiming moral truths are self-evident. The analysis highlights the challenges posed by Moore's intuitive meta-ethical theory, ultimately arguing that the reliance on intuition renders his perspective implausible. The paper provides a thorough examination of the complexities surrounding moral philosophy and the nature of ethical truths.