Is the Debate between Naturalists and Non-Naturalists an Ethical Debate?

Grounding has taken centre stage in moral philosophy. It is increasingly appealed to in characterising the debate between naturalism and non-naturalism, and to explain what the explanatory notion being intimated by phrases such as ‘because’, ‘makes’, and ‘in virtue of’ in normative ethics is. Relatedly, an influential view in metaphysics more generally, and recently in meta-ethics, is that there is only one notion of grounding. In this paper, I argue that if all of these claims are true, then we should stop doing (much of) moral metaphysics; meta-ethicists who wish to discover the nature of moral facts should do normative ethics instead.