Three problems for the evolutionary debunking argument

Abstract

Attempts to debunk evolutionary debunking arguments are not new. Nor is it new to demonstrate how they smuggle old wine into new bottles in the form of metaphysical and epistemological assumptions. 1 What we demonstrate here is the deeper implication of these claims, namely that evolutionary debunking is undermined as a standalone metaethical argument strategy.We begin first by setting out the deep structure of evolutionary debunking argument strategies and explaining what we mean when we say that metaphysical and epistemological conclusions must be assumed or preestablished in order for them to succeed. We will then illustrate how these conclusions are assumed in the debunking literature by examining a particular debate in this literature, the demarcation challenge.