| This dissertation collects three papers relating problems in metaethics to problems in the philosophy of mathematics. "What is Absolute Undecidability?" seeks an understanding of absolute undecidability such that the argument from the absolute undecidability of the Continuum Hypothesis to its indeterminacy is both non-question-begging and plausible. It is argued that the best such understanding---in terms of the possibility of "cognitively flawless" disagreement---generates an argument for the indeterminacy not just of the Continuum Hypothesis, but of standard axioms as well. "The Evolutionary Debunking of Mathematics" discusses the Evolutionary Debunking Argument against moral realism and its application to mathematical realism. It is argued that the Evolutionary Debunking Argument is widely misconceived and that, contrary to the views of many, works equally against mathematical realism. Finally, "Moral Epistemology: The Mathematics Analogy" discusses similarities and differences between epistemological objections to moral realism and epistemological objections to mathematical realism. It is argued that, while there is no simple correspondence between epistemological objections in the two domains, it is hard to see how one could reject moral realism on epistemological grounds, while continuing to embrace mathematical realism---though it may be possible to do the opposite. |
