This surprises me, since usually Anglo-American philosophers are anal about considering all the options (or at least all the options their logical minds can understand), and the possibility there aren't "universal ethical beliefs" (quoting because that seems different than some other similar claims) seems intuitively quite plausible. It reminds me of my high school theology teachers who were more interested in moral education than engaging in real theological discussion (likely, I had one good teacher) or high school English teachers who are more interested in indoctrinating students with made-up grammatical "rules" (don't end a sentence with a preposition) than being linguistically knowledgeable.

I don't think she was a very good teacher or very interested in teaching us. She was basically the economics teacher who (presumably due to the combination of PPE that they have at Oxford) got saddled with the job of providing compulsory philosophy classes to the Oxbridge candidates as part of the prep for winning a place. Needless to say, most of us treated it as a break from our real work and had as little time for the classes as she evidently had for us. It has probably biased me against the concept for life.