GE Moore in his work Pricipia Ethica points out that something complex can be explained by specifying its basic properties (qtd. in Schroeder). In contrast, Moore explains that something simplistic cannot be further explained using basic properties (qtd. in Schroeder). To try to explain something simplistic by basic properties would be to commit a naturalistic fallacy. The naturalistic fallacy is an error because it is an error of definition and is similar to the is-ought distinction. Evolutionary ethics is a good candidate for committing the naturalistic fallacy because it seeks to define ethical terms in terms of naturalistic properties (Boniolo 13, Moore chapter 2, and Schroeder). The proponents of evolutionary ethics, Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer, both committed a naturalistic fallacy by defining the term good as something pleasant (Schroeder). An adequate definition for a term is one that includes the part in a whole (Moore chapter 1). To define the term good in terms of something pleasant is to imply that it has smaller properties/parts (Moore ch...