“Normative” ethical theories

[The Grand Nudger]

Taken at face value, the claim that Nigel has a moral obligation to keep his promise, like the claim that Nyx is a black cat, purports to report a fact and is true if things are as the claim purports. Moral realists are those who think that, in these respects, things should be taken at face value—moral claims do purport to report facts and are true if they get the facts right.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-realism/

An example in use. The author we are/were discussing makes a realist or quasi realist case that there is actually something bad about certain beliefs on moral desert, and that society would see improvements if that sort of ideation was abandoned in ways that cannot be reduced to Just™ that authors opinion. To the extent that this author has confused those beliefs, which fit in any metaethical viewpoint, with a particular metaethical view or even morality as a whole the author may be objectively right that such beliefs cause exactly those issues and objectively wrong that this, then, demonstrates that any metaethical view is incorrect -or- that there is any normative or utilitarian ought in it's abolition.... even if incorrect.