Not really, I can&#x27;t do the debate justice on a tiny HN discussion box. You can go on r&#x2F;AskPhilosophy and ask them about it. You can also seek out Derek Parfit or something.<p>But, it doesn&#x27;t matter if you personally agree with moral realism or not. What matters is that it is controversial and that there is no philosophical consensus. As such, to claim that &quot;there is no objective morality&quot; as axiomatic, is to end an argument before it has begun.<p>edit: Also, I think LessWrong-types cling on hard to a kind of logical positivism that is philosophically pretty primitive. The most exciting way to study this is via Wittgenstein, probably. He was their foremost figure, and then he turned on them. If you don&#x27;t want to delve into philosophy, try to read his biography by Ray Monk- &quot;Duty of Genius&quot;. I think any techie could follow it and enjoy it.