Why did Bernard Williams compare impartial moral reasoning to trying to remove all traces of oneself from one’s own life?

Bernard Williams argued that the ambition of achieving moral objectivity through extreme impartiality is fundamentally misguided because it ignores the essential nature of human life. He compared this pursuit to an individual trying to remove all traces of their own identity from their life because he believed that practical reasoning must be rooted in a person’s existing motives and individual perspective.1

Williams contended that ethical theories claiming universal validity or strong impartiality attempt to transcend the very point of view that gives a person’s life meaning. By seeking to eliminate the "perspectival peculiarities" of the individual, such theories fail to account for the contingency, complexity, and individuality of human existence. For Williams, practical reasons for action are "internal," meaning they must derive from the motives a person already possesses rather than being imposed by an abstract, impersonal standard. Consequently, he believed that moral theories undermining personal projects and relationships are not only absurd but also likely to be profoundly self-deceived.1