Does anyone own "The Moral Landscape"?

[The Grand Nudger]

Sure.

I guess I'm not seeing the relevance of moral facts.  Moral fiction can be equally as useful in reaching a consensus.

Moral facts are as relevant and useful as any other fact when it comes to making an informed decision, in my opinion.  

Moral fiction can be effective, absolutely.  So can moral subjectivity.  There are a wide range of situations where it may not matter...or matter much, whether you're in possession of moral fact, moral fiction, or a meaningfully subjective moral opinion.  OFC, when it would be nice to have moral facts, for an informed decision.....

I'm not entirely clear on upon what you've asked for agreement.

Good, so that's one out of three.

The other two were that..when we talk about morality, we're talking about -something-..and at least one of those things is well being. 

If we're talking about something (we are), and one of those somethings is wellbeing(it is), and propositions about wellbeing can be labeled true or false(they can be), then there is at least the possibility of a moral fact.

It is a hemi-semi-demi-educated, professional opinion.

What else would it be?

..............does a hemi-semi-demi-educated, professional opinion make use of facts?  Can it be constructed without one?

I think it might be helpful to seperate the issues of whether or not there is such a thing as a moral fact and what utility they have. Its come up a couple of times now...but... a moral fact being useless would still be a moral fact. A useful moral fiction would still not be a fact. Alot of worry about some other foot falling or what we would use them for is just getting in the way.

There really is no other foot. It may not be useful (other things may even be more effective). Moral realism simply states that at least some moral statements purport to report facts, and insomuch as they get those facts right, they are true or false. I note that you've mentioned a sense of balance or equilibrium. This isn't a competing position for moral realism or harm based moral realism. Balance, or equilibirum, is a rough metric of desert.

Heres where I would turn that question around. What else would it be? If any other statement purports to report a fact, and does get those facts right, we call it true. So, what else would a moral fact be, but a fact, if there are or can be facts?

Conversely, if there can't be moral facts...why? What about a moral fact makes it a "non-fact" when any other statement of it's type -is- a fact?