A prevalent assumption in metaethics is that people believe in moral objectivity. If this assumption were true then people
should believe in the possibility of objective moral progress, objective moral knowledge, and objective moral error. We
developed surveys to investigate whether these predictions hold. Our results suggest that, neither abstractly nor concretely,
people dominantly believe in the possibility of objective moral progress, knowledge and error. They attribute less
objectivity to these phenomena than in the case of science and no more, or only slightly more, than in the cases of social
conventions and personal preferences. This finding was obtained for a regular sample as well as for a sample of
people who are particularly likely to be reflective and informed (philosophers and philosophy students). Our
paper hence contributes to recent empirical challenges to the thesis that people believe in moral objectivity.