Even in cases of such basic disagreement, we have room for discourse. Both parties can set out their reasoning, and look to the other for coherence, contrast, contradiction and so forth. There are indeed issues here.
And of course, the discourse is not guaranteed to come to a conclusion.
Deliberating on “why?” is not excluded by my argument, but set aside in cases of agreement. What is left was sufficient to show that the nihilist must, despite their disposition, engage in ethical discussion. Ethics is unavoidable.
It might be of interest to continue with a discussion of the differences between Nussbaum and Foot, something that Tim and Tom brought to my attention. Perhaps a new thread. This one is well past it’s use by.