Traditionally, the realism and anti-realism debate within metaphysics has been restricted to a dichotomy between realism and anti-realism. This dichotomy trickles down to more specific areas within the debate. One of these areas effected by the traditional realism and anti-realism dichotomy is moral realism and moral anti-realism. This thesis focuses on moral realism and moral anti-realism, and shows that restricting the debate to only moral realism and moral anti-realism is a false dichotomy. It does this through providing an alternative option to the two traditionally given: Humean Scepticism. The goal of this thesis is to argue that Humean Scepticism is a viable third option in the moral realism and moral anti-realism debate. This thesis demonstrates that scepticism should sometimes be taken seriously and acknowledged in some debates that it has traditionally been excluded from.