The debate between moral supervenience and non-supervenience centers on the relationship between moral properties and non-moral properties. Moral supervenience holds that moral properties are dependent on non-moral properties, while non-supervenience holds that moral properties are independent of non-moral properties.

David Hume is most closely associated with the theory of moral supervenience. In his book A Treatise of Human Nature, Hume argues that moral properties are dependent on non-moral properties, such as feelings and desires.

Immanuel Kant is most closely associated with the theory of moral non-supervenience. In his book Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that moral properties are independent of non-moral properties, such as feelings and desires.

The main argument for moral supervenience is that moral properties are supervenient on non-moral properties. This means that moral properties cannot exist without non-moral properties. For example, the moral property of goodness cannot exist without the non-moral property of pleasure.

The main argument for moral non-supervenience is that moral properties are not supervenient on non-moral properties. This means that moral properties can exist without non-moral properties. For example, the moral property of goodness can exist without the non-moral property of pleasure.

The implications of moral supervenience for moral theory are that moral theories should focus on the relationship between moral properties and non-moral properties. This is because moral supervenience holds that moral properties are dependent on non-moral properties.

The implications of moral non-supervenience for moral theory are that moral theories should focus on the moral properties themselves, rather than on the non-moral properties that give rise to them. This is because moral non-supervenience holds that moral properties are independent of non-moral properties.

The goodness of an action depends on the pleasure it produces is an example of moral supervenience because the moral property of goodness is dependent on the non-moral property of pleasure.

The rightness of an action depends on the intentions of the agent is an example of moral non-supervenience because the moral property of rightness is independent of the non-moral property of intentions.

Moral supervenience is compatible with moral realism because moral realism is the view that moral properties are objective and independent of human minds. Moral supervenience holds that moral properties are dependent on non-moral properties, but this does not mean that moral properties are not objective or independent of human minds.

Moral non-supervenience is compatible with moral anti-realism because moral anti-realism is the view that moral properties are not objective or independent of human minds. Moral non-supervenience holds that moral properties are independent of non-moral properties, but this does not mean that moral properties are objective or independent of human minds.

There are a number of challenges to the theory of moral supervenience. These include the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be supervenient on non-moral properties, the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be objective and independent of human minds if they are supervenient on non-moral properties, and the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be universal and cross-cultural if they are supervenient on non-moral properties.

There are a number of challenges to the theory of moral non-supervenience. These include the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be independent of non-moral properties, the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be objective and independent of human minds if they are independent of non-moral properties, and the challenge of explaining how moral properties can be universal and cross-cultural if they are independent of non-moral properties.

G.E. Moore is most closely associated with the theory of moral particularism. In his book Principia Ethica, Moore argues that moral properties are not supervenient on non-moral properties and that there are no universal moral principles.

Immanuel Kant is most closely associated with the theory of moral universalism. In his book Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that there is a single, universal moral principle that all rational beings must follow.