David Enoch has argued that we can be justified in believing in irreducibly normative reasons on the grounds that such reasons are deliberatively indispensable. This deliberative indispensability argument has been attacked from a variety of angles and is generally held to be rather weak. In this paper, I argue that existing criticisms of the deliberative indispensability argument do not touch the core of Enoch's argument. Properly understood, the deliberative indispensability argument is much stronger than its critics allege. It deserves to be taken seriously.

中文翻译：

---

为审慎的必要性辩护

大卫·伊诺克（David Enoch）认为，我们有理由相信不可简化的规范性理由，因为这些理由是慎重不可缺少的。这种经过深思熟虑的不可或缺的论点已经从各种角度受到攻击，并且通常被认为是相当薄弱的。在本文中，我认为对审议的不可或缺性论证的现有批评并未触及以诺论证的核心。正确理解，深思熟虑的必要性论证比其批评者所声称的要强大得多。值得认真对待。