the same should be true of moral philosophers?

Does "the same should be true of moral philosophers" mean "for moral philosophers, the situation should be the same"?


Context:

"Beautifully written as they were (the eegance of his prose is a distilled blend of honesty and clarity) there was little in Sam Harris's prevous books that couldn't have been written by any of his fellow "horsemen" of the "new atheism." This book is different though every bit as readable as the other two. I was one of those who had unthinkingly bought into the hectoring myth that science can say nothing about morals. To my surprise, The Moral Landscape has changed all that for me. It should change it for philosophers too. Philosophers of mind have already discovered that they can't duck the
study of neuroscience, and the best of them have raised their game as a result. Sam Harris shows that the same should be true of moral philosophers, and it will turn their world exhilaratingly upside down. As for religion, and the preposterous idea that we need God to be good, nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.
-Richard Dawkins, University of Oxford