Beauty, Morality, God, and a Table

[FrustratedFool]

Doesn't that assume:
a) Beauty and morality are things which statements about can, in fact, be true/false?
b) There is literally zero other information available (like all the arguments for the existence of God, or the opinions of all other people in the world, and so on)?

It's a hypothetical, thus a and b are moot. If we're talking about something other than a hypothetical then the principle of insufficient reason need not apply.

In the hypothetical a would still apply, surely? Otherwise you could apply (misapply?) the principle of insufficient reason to the hypothetical, '10 people look at a green, and 3 declare it to be frubious, 7 don't'. Or something like that. If it makes no sense to talk of something being correct/incorrect then it still be nonsense even in a hypothetical scenario.

As for b, my hypothetical assumed a real world context.