Gibbardian Humility: Moral Fallibility and Moral Smugness

Andy Egan objects to quasi-realism that quasi-realists are committed to a form of smugness: when confronted with cases of fundamental disagreement, the quasi-realist must see him/herself as immune to moral error in a way that others are not. I urge that the concern can be tamed by considering the vice of smugness and the role it and its corresponding virtue should play in moral conversations. Here the quasi-realist need suppose no asymmetry to obtain between the level of epistemic humility he is prepared to extend to of moral disagreement and the level he expects from others. Such considerations suffice to tame Egan’s concern providing we follow Allan Gibbard in understanding the quasi-realist to be committed only to a modest and not to a grandiose form of moral objectivity.