I think the idea is to assign credences to plausible theories, where plausible is taken to mean some subset of the following:
Has been argued for in good faith by professional philosophers
Has relevant and well-reasoned arguments in favour of it
Accords at least partially with moral intuitions
Is consistent/parsimonious/not metaphysically untoward/precise/ etc (the usual desiderata for explanations/theories)
Concerns the usual domain of moral theories(values, agents, decisions, etc)
Another equivalent way to proceed is to consider all possible theories, but the credence given to the (completely) implausible theories is 0 or sufficiently close to it.
I think the idea is to assign credences to plausible theories, where plausible is taken to mean some subset of the following:
Has been argued for in good faith by professional philosophers
Has relevant and well-reasoned arguments in favour of it
Accords at least partially with moral intuitions
Is consistent/parsimonious/not metaphysically untoward/precise/ etc (the usual desiderata for explanations/theories)
Concerns the usual domain of moral theories(values, agents, decisions, etc)
Another equivalent way to proceed is to consider all possible theories, but the credence given to the (completely) implausible theories is 0 or sufficiently close to it.