I was reading Dancy’s nonnaturalism entry to Copp’s Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Dancy discusses two arguments against naturalism which Parfit has presented in some of his unpublished writings. The first one is called the triviality objection against analytic versions of naturalism. Initially, I did find this argument compelling. However, at the same time I was reading Blackburn's Spreading the Word on the problems of intensional semantics. I think there is a nice reply to Parfit on those grounds - it's the same strategy as used to reply to the open question arguments.