Are there moral facts? Are there mathematical facts? Many say yes to the latter but no to the former. Justin Clarke-Doane argues that the situation is much more subtle: although there are no real moral facts, morality is objective in a paradigmatic respect. Conversely, while there are real mathematical facts, mathematics fails to be objective.

Justin Clarke-Doane is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University. He is also an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham and an Adjunct Research Associate at Monash University. He has previously been Visiting Scholar at the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology (IHPST) at Pantheon-Sorbonne University (Paris 1). His work centers on metaphysical and epistemological problems surrounding apparently a priori domains, such as morality, modality, mathematics, and logic. He received his PhD in Philosophy from New York University in 2011 and obtained his BA in Philosophy and Mathematics from New College of Florida in 2005.

• Introduction


• 1: Realism, Ontology, and Objectivity


• 2: Self-Evidence, Proof, and Disagreement


• 3: Observation and Indispensability


• 4: Genealogical Debunking Arguments


• 5: Explaining our Reliability


• 6: Realism, Objectivity, and Evaluation


• Conclusion