Funnily enough, the childish performance of inability to read simple and clear writing that the critics of analytic philosophy are doing on here right now is reminiscent more than anything of a familiar style of argument in - you guessed it - analytic philosophy
so: “many” who, how many, most? “evo psychs and philosophers believe” in the same way? “shaped” meaninglessly indeterminate. “in their view” is this cashing out ‘shaped’, their one view? are the examples from the lit (citable) or supposedly ordinary illustrative moral beliefs?