是否有規範的真理？建構論與實在論都主張有。實在論往往認為規範的真理乃是獨立於人的心靈而存在，並且是基於獨立自存的規範事實而有。建構論則主張並無所謂獨立自存的規範事實，並且規範的真理（例如有關正義、價值、行為之對錯、行為之理由的真理）乃是經由某種程序的建構而有。建構論的立場眾多，本課程主要聚焦於後設倫理學中的兩種建構論立場：康德式建構論和休謨式建構論。康德式建構論主張經由程序可建構出對於一切的理性行動者皆普遍適用的規範真理；相對於此，休謨式建構論則質疑任何關於規範真理之客觀性的絕對主義，並極力主張被建構之規範真理的相對客觀性。在本課程中，我們將閱讀關於建構論的重要著作，尤其關注於康德式和休謨式建構論之間的爭辯議題，然後分析並檢視其論證是否成立。
Are there any normative truths? Both constructivism and realism answer this question in the affirmative. According to realism, normative truths are mind-independent and have as their truth-maker the corresponding intrinsically normative facts. In contrast, constructivism denies that mind-independent normative facts exist, and holds instead that normative truths (regarding, for example, justice, value, moral obligation, reason for action, etc.) are constructed by way of some procedure. Among a variety of constructivist positions, only two will be our main concern: Kantian constructivism and Humean constructivism. According to Kantian constructivism, the normative truths issuing from the procedure of construction apply to any rational agent as such. According to Humean constructivism, however, the claim that normative truths are absolutely objective is untenable; in addition, Humean relativism about normative truths would turn out to fare better than Kantian absolutism. In this course, we will read and examine some important works on constructivism and, in particular on the issue debated between Kantian and Humean constructivists.