Abstract

A rarely considered variety of objectivism in ethics takes the claim to objectivity of scientific and ethical judgments to be completely analogous. I show that this position is challenged by the socalled relativism of distance: Although we can make claims to objectivity in both areas, it is possible that agreement within each area extends to different degrees. A proper understanding of this challenge paves the way for us to make sense of two widely held assumptions: first, that there is objectivity in ethics, and second, that the claim to objectivity in ethics reaches a limit that the sciences can transcend.