Abstract:
There are instances of moral unanimity. There are also instances of moral diversity. I argue that
emotion-based accounts of moral judgment can plausibly explain such instances (and this counts
as a reason in favour of such accounts). I also argue that such accounts can best a rival
conventionalist account in at least one respect in explaining (instances of) moral unanimity and
diversity. I make these arguments with the aim of prompting ‘fence-sitters’ to side with such
emotion-based accounts of moral judgments.