This chapter deals with the relation between two metaethical theses: moral naturalism and moral skepticism. Moral naturalism and moral skepticism are certainly not contradictories; they do not exhaust the space of metaethical possibilities. It is usual to think of them as contraries, for surely to embrace one position is to reject the other. The chapter explores the possibility of an irresolvable indeterminacy between moral naturalism and moral skepticism. David Lewis located one potential node of indeterminacy: between moral naturalism and error theoretic moral skepticism. The chapter investigates the potential undecidability of the debate between cognitivism and non-cognitivism. Rudolf Carnap invites open competition with his cognitivist rival. Having discussed Lewis and Carnap, it seems apt to end with the philosopher who best connects them: W. V. Quine. Faced with the nodes of indeterminacy, the author counsels neither sectarianism nor ecumenicalism in particular, but rather what might be called "metaethical ambivalence".