[...] With this done, the task of writing simplified explanations thereof ought to be performable by someone other than me; they don’t have to invent the knowledge, only understand it thoroughly enough to explain it correctly.
This phrasing makes it sound like you invented non-weepy materialism. Come on, this is standard stuff.
Carl may be slightly overstating the standardness of my metaethics (which if you consider it as a false appeal to authority, is also a flaw). I’ve yet to see anything that I recognize as being exactly like my own version, and “irrealism” is not how I would describe it. In particular, I think I rescue more moral appearances than other attempted reductions I’ve seen (like “murder is wrong regardless of what you think of it”).
This phrasing makes it sound like you invented non-weepy materialism. Come on, this is standard stuff.
Carl may be slightly overstating the standardness of my metaethics (which if you consider it as a false appeal to authority, is also a flaw). I’ve yet to see anything that I recognize as being exactly like my own version, and “irrealism” is not how I would describe it. In particular, I think I rescue more moral appearances than other attempted reductions I’ve seen (like “murder is wrong regardless of what you think of it”).