It's not uninteresting but it's a fast "argument" that really just dresses up George Moore's Intuitionism IMHO, which itself remains in disrespect. Google it, d

It's not uninteresting but it's a fast "argument" that really just dresses up George Moore's Intuitionism IMHO, which itself remains in disrespect. Google it, don't buy the book. It has many followers not because it's a great argument (assuming it qualifies as that) but because there simply aren't better arguments for Moore's side of the debate. I am biased though, I've met the man and we really didn't like one another, our values were far too opposed when we met. From my brief exposure, in life he seemed to be a mandarin who played the academic system expertly for his own benefit, with a public persona crafted to help with that. His private and public opinions could diverge to a staggering degree, but at least he did sometimes share some of his private opinions with youngsters, even if he wouldn't own them in any other context. A conscious hypocrite, I give him that.