problems with philosophy of science and reason in general notwithstanding

not·with·stand·ing
/ˌnätwiTHˈstandiNG,ˌnätwiT͟HˈstandiNG/
preposition
1.
in spite of.
"notwithstanding the evidence, the consensus is that the jury will not reach a verdict"
synonyms: in spite of, despite, regardless of, for all
"notwithstanding the evidence, the consensus is that the jury will not reach a verdict"
adverb
1.
nevertheless; in spite of this.
"I didn't like it. Notwithstanding, I remained calm"
synonyms: nevertheless, nonetheless, even so, all the same, in spite of this/that, despite this/that, after everything, however, still, yet, be that as it may, having said that, that said, for all that, just the same, anyway, in any event, at any rate, at all events, when all is said and done; More
conjunction
1.
although; in spite of the fact that.
"notwithstanding that the hall was packed with bullies, our champion played on steadily and patiently"
synonyms: although, in spite of the fact that, despite the fact that, even though, though, for all that
"notwithstanding that Sir Henry had sold much land, his debts were still on the increase"
~ google

Let's rewrite this. "In spite of [problems with philosophy of science] and [reason in general], 'moral questions' will have objectively right and wrong answers."

Replacing the goofy words with more familiar words and marking off the clauses, we see that the sentence is gramatically correct as it stands. This is the strong feature of philosophy: replacing easily understood words with unfamiliar words, and then combining unfamiliar words with esoteric concepts and goofy names, they manage to fill pages without ever saying anything of substance.

In this case the fallacy is a misused word: "moral". When two or more people live in the same area they have to adopt some rules about who does what to whom. Any such rule is called a more', French accented e pronounced "mor-ay". The adjective form is moral, and the habit of following more's is morality. More's are arbitrary: they do not have to be right, only accepted. Another group on the other side of the river might have very different more's. So this author's reference to "objectively right and wrong answers" is simply a mistake. He has not adequately studied his subject.

They're synonymous; either is acceptable.

generally notwithstanding, ...

Science and reason in general notwithstanding,

These do not have the same meaning.

"Problems with philosophy of science and reason generally notwithstanding", and "problems with philosophy of science and reason in general notwithstanding" do have the same meaning, however.

In that case you shouldn't have any difficulty detailing the different meanings.

In this introductory phrase ...
generally notwithstanding: “generally” is an adverb that describes “how much” is the level of notwithstanding, much like if totally or somewhat was used.

Science and reason in general: “in general” is an adjective that describes science and reason, as opposed to specifically or sometimes.

"In general" in this context would count as an adverbial phrase, so the meaning is interchangeable.

https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/21177/is-the-adverbial-phrase-and-adverb-phrase-identical/21178

Here’s a simplified way to show my view. Note the difference:

Problems in general notwithstanding, he made it to class every day.

Problems with his car in general notwithstanding, he made it to class everyday.

Those are two different sentences. Within the context of oristarA's sentence, "in general" and "generally" convey the same meaning and are interchangeable.

Two replies later you still can't say what the difference is in meaning. You can't say it because there is none. You say different terms describe different things but you've no idea what that difference is, because there is none.

Then you change the subject with another pair of sentences that add absolutely nothing.

Let me simplify it for you. You're wrong, you're sounding increasingly absurd.