 Different kinds of support have been offered for the first premise of the EDA – it could be that mind-independence and evolutionary influence would mean it would be a huge coincidence if our normative beliefs were true, and that fact undermines our normative knowledge. (Street 2006; see also Bedke 2014, though Bedke’s objection is against non-naturalism in particular). Or perhaps evolution would mean that beliefs about mind-independent normative facts would be insensitive: we would have those beliefs regardless of whether they were true. Shafer-Landau (2012) presents a good overview of different arguments here.