Main thinker note: Lance Bush — positions, arguments, all located source notes, and journal previews. The earlier identification and resource material is preserved below.
Strongest match: Lance S. Bush, creator of Lance Independent. Your existing metaethics notebook index identifies “Lance Bush critiques Andrew Wilson’s metaethics,” March 21–June 9 2026, handwritten pp. 160–162: . This makes him the likely person you remember; it does not establish which video you watched.
Identity and credentials
His own biography gives a PhD in social psychology from Cornell and an MA in philosophy from Tufts. It identifies moral antirealism as his position and metaethics and moral psychology as research areas. “PhD in ethics” is therefore an imprecise recollection.
- Lance Independent on YouTube
- About and academic background
- God and stance-dependence — June 10, 2025 — Bush’s own article explicitly discusses the Danny/Parker exchange with Andrew Wilson and Jay Dyer.
Why this is relevant to the Wilson argument
Bush’s position: he denies stance-independent moral facts. He is therefore useful for understanding and testing antirealist replies, rather than as a proponent of secular moral realism. Explaining a realist theory fairly does not mean endorsing it.
In God and stance-dependence, he distinguishes relativity to different standards from dependence on a stance. On his stipulated taxonomy, an account in which all moral truths depend on God’s stances is antirealist; an account that grounds them differently must be assessed separately. He explicitly allows that some theistic accounts need not be antirealist. Treat this as a taxonomic and substantive dispute to clarify, rather than a label that defeats every religious account.
Two separate questions for your project:
- Could objective morality exist without God? Compare Moral Naturalism, Ethical non-naturalism, and the realist reading route in Books for Metaethics.
- What can someone who rejects stance-independent moral facts still say about ethics? Study the antirealist options in Moral Realism vs. Anti-Realism and Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism.
Another possible match: Kane B
If you remember a numbered series of lecture-style lessons, Kane B / Kane Baker is another plausible match. His channel has a Metaethics — Moral Naturalism 1 lesson, whose own description lists naturalist theories, their advantages, the is–ought gap, the open-question argument, and objections about normativity. This is a verified lesson to compare with your recollection, not confirmation that it was the video you watched.
Use with your existing notes
Start with the biography and the Wilson/Dyer article → return to → test one positive argument in . The notebook entry confirms the personal connection; the article supplies a verified direct connection to Wilson. A specific lesson or video has not been authenticated from that notebook entry.